Comments on: Heritage Foundation: Just Don’t Call it Nullification!

By: Nullify Obamacare! - I Heard The People Say

Nullify Obamacare! - I Heard The People Say — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:51:15 +0000

[...] is a tool, not a “thing” like a piece of legislation. Recommended articles can be found here and here, at the Tenth Amendment Center’s website, the organization which hosted the [...]

By: Jeff Matthews

Jeff Matthews — Mon, 23 May 2011 21:37:44 +0000

Yes, something like that. At least you see the flaw in the reasoning people use. Your answer is that the self-correcting mechanism is either at the ballot box or through some other undisclosed mechanism. This flaw does not negate the propriety of nullification, though. It just leads to a proper introspection that the matter does not square with the concepts of "dual" or "multiple" sovereignty.

By: Steve Palmer

Steve Palmer — Mon, 23 May 2011 20:26:03 +0000

I touched on this question briefly in an article back in December. Basically, I think that it's a self-correcting system.
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/27/do… –

Similarly, if a small number of states incorrectly nullify a Constitutional power, they are unlikely to be able to maintain resistance over long periods of time. Eventually, the state politicians will change, and the federal government will pounce on the opportunity to eliminate the erroneous nullification.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Mon, 23 May 2011 18:15:42 +0000

Isn't the remedy implicit in the words of the Tenth Amendment? Is there not, in the words of the Tenth Amendment, an implicit admonition to each state — in the face of unconstitutional federal acts/impositions/tyrannies (whether executive, legislative, judicial or some combination thereof) imposed on it and its constituents — to nullify those unconstitutional federal acts/impositions/tyrannies?
State legislators and governors: For the sake of your state, your constituents, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, please nullify accordingly.

By: Steve Palmer

Steve Palmer — Sun, 22 May 2011 21:41:03 +0000

lol. I'm amazed by the time stamps. Your comment wasn't there when I started typing. Looks like I was proof reading for 55 minutes!

By: MichaelBoldin

MichaelBoldin — Sun, 22 May 2011 21:37:08 +0000

Much more positive than, me….I have to keep that perspective in mind! You\’re absolutely right, though…

By: Steve Palmer

Steve Palmer — Sun, 22 May 2011 21:33:50 +0000

I realize that the folks on this website like to expand the definition of nullification to include all those things. But I think those things are analytically different from legal nullification and it is not helpful to combine them and discuss them as a single concept.

Now that's progress! If you want to use nullification to mean, "legal nullification" elsewhere, please do (although I'd suggest that someone needs to do a better job defining that term 'cause as used by Spalding, it's very confusing), but here on this website, we can feel free to use the definition used by "the folks on this website" (and Jefferson). Under that definition, it now appears that we are in agreement that nullification is a valid recourse for the states when confronted with an unconstitutional federal action. Welcome to the resistance! So let's start talking about "when", not "whether" to use nullification. IMO, a much more useful topic of debate.

BTW, I note that you didn't respond to my earlier comment. If you still want to claim that "legal nullification" somehow violates the Constitution, you have to show us where it is prohibited. Since the Constitution uses black lists (as in article I, section X, for example) to restrict the states' powers, if a power is not explicitly prohibited, then it's not prohibited at all. So where in the Constitution did the states agree that they would not act to prevent the federal government from performing unconstitutional actions?

By: PsiOp Radio 145 â€“ 110522 | ANOMALY RADIO

PsiOp Radio 145 â€“ 110522 | ANOMALY RADIO — Sun, 22 May 2011 21:20:54 +0000

[...] Heritage Foundation: Just Donâ€™t Call it Nullification! http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/05/21/heritage-foundation-just-dont-call-it-nullification/ [...]

By: MichaelBoldin

MichaelBoldin — Sun, 22 May 2011 20:38:06 +0000

Lawyers, widely despised by the general public, generally do place great concern in such trivialities…the pulic at large, though, is concerned about what happens in practice.

Whether the issue is weed or natioanl I’d card, or the tsa….when enough people say no to the Feds, and enough states back them up, theres not much that dc can do about it. And when they can barely enforce their unconstitutional acts, the public sees that as nullified.

Thanks for your input, though, lawyer…

By: Steve Palmer

Steve Palmer — Sun, 22 May 2011 20:37:17 +0000

The edit worked and I saw it in the hotline too. Thank you!