Will Michigan Nullify Federal Gun Laws?
12. Aug, 2009 
35 Comments
by Michael Boldin
Introduced in the Michigan House on August 11, 2009, the “Firearms Freedom Act” (HB-5232) seeks “to make certain findings regarding intrastate commerce; to prohibit federal regulation of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition involved purely in intrastate commerce in [the State of Michigan]; to provide for certain exceptions to federal regulation; and to establish certain manufacturing requirements.”
The bill was authored by Rep. Phillip Pavlov and currently has 44 co-sponsors.
While the HB5232’s title focuses on federal gun regulations, it has far more to do with the 10th Amendment’s limit on the power of the federal government. It specifically states:
The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under amendments IX and X of the constitution of the United States, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
Some supporters of the legislation say that a successful application of such a state-law would set a strong precedent and open the door for states to take their own positions on a wide range of activities that they see as not being authorized to the Federal Government by the Constitution.
Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter:
The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to ‘all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees’ in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature. ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that ‘Federal law supersedes the Act’, and thus the ATF considers it meaningless.
Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders’ vision of constitutional government:
“Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter.”
“This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t suit them.”
Advocates of these efforts say it doesn’t matter if the federal government disagrees, or even threatens states over funding, as they did recently with Oklahoma. Gary Marbut, author of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, and founder of http://www.firearmsfreedomact.com/ took this position in a recent interview with the Tenth Amendment Center:
“We’re not depending on permission from federal judges to be able to effectuate our state-made guns bills. And, we’re working on other strategies to wrest essential and effective power from the federal government and put it where it belongs.“
The principle behind such legislation is nullification, which has a long history in the American tradition. When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.
All across the country, activists and state-legislators are pressing for similar legislation, to nullify specific federal laws within their states.
A proposed Constitutional Amendment to effectively ban national health care will go to a vote in Arizona in 2010. Thirteen states now have some form of medical marijuana laws – in direct contravention to federal laws which state that the plant is illegal in all circumstances. And, massive state nullification of the 2005 Real ID Act has rendered the law void.
While many advocates concede that a federal court battle has a slim chance of success, they point to the successful nullification of the Real ID Act as a blueprint to resist various federal laws that they see as outside the scope of the Constitution.
Some say that each successful state-level resistance to federal programs will only embolden others to try the same – resulting in an eventual shift of power from the federal government to the States and the People themselves.
Copyright © 2009 by TenthAmendmentCenter.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
If you enjoyed this post:
Click Here to Get the Free Tenth Amendment Center Newsletter,
I’d like to see the same concept in place for cap and trade too! Anyone working on that?
I’ve read a little about AZ possibly doing something like this as far as cap-and-trade, but don’t have any confirmation. If anyone has news of it, please send it our way!
Arizona is drafting a constitutional amendment for the U.S. Constitution or the AZ state Constitution?
CRAP and RAID.
Sometimes I just cant believe the audacity of these federal halogens.
JMB – I’m right there with you….
The federal government’s dirty little secret is that Michigan doesn’t need any laws or resolutions to protect itself and its citizens from federal gun control laws. Go to http://www.poorclydesalmanac.info/articles/?p=14 and discover the truth about federal gun legislation.
The same is true for the federal Income Tax. Read “Cracking the Code (CTC) the Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America” by Michigan native Peter Hendrickson.
The 50 Union States gave up their Sovereignty by their own hand. Don’t expect them to protect our Liberty without their sovereignty. Liberty and Sovereignty are companion concepts involving a state of mind commanding the necessary behavior to protect them. The 10th Amendment does not guarantee Union State sovereignty. It only declares that whatever powers and status the Union States and their citizens had at the time of the ratification are not altered by the Constitution of the United States. At the time of the ratification of said Constitution, the Union States and the citizens thereof gained their Sovereignty by and through the American Revolution. Therefore, their asking to have it back by petition or resolution is ludicrous. They first have to find the cause for their losing it. Hint: Find to whom they each pay a tax!!!
Clyde – some good perspective there. But, one important error.
In the American system, it’s the People, not governments (either state or federal), who are the Sovereign. And sovereignty is defined as final authority.
The people created both the federal and their state governments to be their agents for certain enumerated purposes and nothing more. And, since the people are sovereign, in the end it doesn’t matter what “laws” the governments pass – the people can exercise their sovereignty any time they choose. It’s our goal to help educate people on this – and motivate them to get active.
Matthew,
AZ is working on an amendment for their state constitution, which trumps the Federal government in any conflict regarding powers outside of those enumerated in the constitution.
“While many advocates concede that a federal court battle has a slim chance of success, they point to the successful nullification of the Real ID Act as a blueprint to resist various federal laws that they see as outside the scope of the Constitution.”
WTF? What do they mean slim chance of success? How about the states start doing their job and sending State Police and calling up the unorganized militia to protect their citezens from the federal criminal organizations such as BATF, FBI, IRS, etc? If the governor tolerates federal intervention into the legality of state laws set by the people then the governor is treasonous and the federal government by attmepting to subdue the people of a soverein state have committed an act of war!
Shane, I think you might be misunderstanding.
The sentence you quoted from the article says that a federal court battle has a slim chance of success
States doing their job, as you’ve pointed out, is something that needs to be done, but this is completely separate from whether or not the federal government’s courts approve of it. Which they won’t.
I have to wonder if the States will have the spine to face down the Feds if the time comes. Things seem to be slowly building that spine, but until push comes to shove we won’t know.
Let’s hope the spine is there when the Feds push. If it’s not, well I don’t like to consider the potential results of that.
If the state had balls they would take these ATF chickenshits into custody and boot their asses out of the state and dare them to come back.
mdp, in due time! I think there’s plenty of people that are ready to see things happen, but demanding that 100+ years of tyranny be overturned immediately, is going to create more problems than it solves. One step at a time.
1. get a 10th amendment resolution introduced.
2. start pushing bills nullifying federal laws.
3. nullify more laws
4. stop turning over $$ to the feds
5. ??
I think there’s a long, long way to go, but a bill like this in Michigan, Florida and 26 other states has the beginning of something big.
Ponder This
The Truth will set you Free.
Can someone prove this as being incorrect, when you sign your voter registration form you are voluntarily
Swearing under oath, That you live in the District of Columbia, or one of its subdivisions, and want to be treated as a corporate slave with NO Constitutional Rights as a corporate citizen? And also that the Social Security Number is the nexus, that makes you that slave in the corporate matrix?
This is the correct Elector Registration Form for a Citizen of one of the 50 Countries of the Union
Your County Clerk and Recorder
Street Domicile
Any town, Ohio [zip]
01/01/2008
John Galt
215 Mesa Street
Any town, Ohio [zip]
Elector Registration-notice of changes
Nativity-natural live birth, 01/01/0000 in Any town, Iowa. Not in a Territory or possession of the United States.
I have lived in Ohio since January of 2008.
I have lived at my present domicile 215 Mesa Street, Anytown in Ohio, since January of 2008.
I am a Citizen of Ohio and America. I am an Ohioan and an American.
I am a free black, yellow, red, brown, white Man/Woman.
Party Enrollment – Unaffiliated.
Remove the Social Security Number from the registration card. The Social Security Number is the Property of the Social Security Administration and I DO NOT own it. And therefore it is not mine to give out.
I was not born in the United States. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, Federal areas, Territories, or possessions thereof)
I am not a citizen of the United States (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, any Territory or possession of the United States).
I am not a United States person.
I am not a corporate person, citizen or individual.
I do not currently have a residence nor have I ever resided in the United States. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, Federal areas, Territories, or possessions thereof)
Ohio is not a part of the United States. Federal areas inside Ohio are Territories of and a part of the United States.
I do not live in a Federal area, also known as in the State, or within the State, or a Territory of the United States.
I do not live in a State, or any geographical area that is a part of the United States. (Territories or possessions of Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia.)
Definitions from USCS:
26 USC Sec. 7701 (a)
(9) United States – The term “United States” when used in a geographical sense includes only the States (any Territory or possession of the United States) and the District of Columbia.
(10) State – The term “State” shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.
(30) United States person. The term ‘United States person’ means-
(A) a citizen or resident of the United States.
(B) a domestic partnership.
(C) a domestic corporation, and
(D) any estate or trust (other than a foreign estate or foreign trust, within the meaning of section 7701(a)(31)).
THE STATES 4 USCS Sec. 110
As used in sections 105-109 of this title-
(d) The term “State” includes any Territory or possession of the United States.
(e) The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United States or any department, establishment, or agency of the United States; and any Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State (Territory or possession of the United States), shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State (Territory or possession of the United States). (Inside the outer boundaries of, but not part of, the 50 countries of the Union)
28 USC Sec. 1746: Unsworn Declarations Under Penalty of Perjury.
(1) If executed without the United States: “I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the united states of America that the foregoing is true and correct.” Executed on (date). (Signature)
(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.” Executed on (date). (Signature)
Since I was not born, and do not live, or work in the United States. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, Federal areas, Territories, or possessions thereof)
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of Ohio and under the Constitution for The united states of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on 01-01-2008.
All Rights Reserved
Sincerely,
John Galt
PS. On all contracts, Voter/Elector Registration, Drivers License, Mortgage, Employment, Traffic Tickets, Bank Account, Rental, that you put your signature on, first thing to do, is write above where you will sign- All Rights Reserved –this throws the contract that it is written under, the UCC Code -UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE, that all CORPORATIONS operate under, back into common law. This will protect your Constitutional Rights. This will move you one-step higher above/over the corporate matrix, and back to being the Master over the corporate matrix, instead of being a slave under the corporate matrix.
PPS. I have this on file with the county clerks office and I elect the least offensive lying scumbag that I can.
To oppose the “Law of Rule” while at the same time embracing order and the “Rule of Law” makes us true Americans. It seems that the states are understanding this to some degree and that restores my faith a little, in this country.
I don’t understand the argument. The Constitution formed and established the government of the United states. What has that to do with the United States Government?
What has a state which is some men or a people under the law of nations have to do with a State which is a political subdivision of the United States.
The union consists of 38 states of which Oregon was the last to join in union with the others. Since then others were territories renamed States under the authority of the Office of the President not going through the Constitutional method of approval of the Congress.
You may ask a question in an inappropriate manner such as confusing “state” with “State”, and obtain an appropriate answer to the question asked. What value is the answer?
well…the state MOTO is…Live Free or Die
=)
The complete quote is “Live Free or Die, for death is not the worst of evils.”
you have no rights,you took away excon’s rights away that gave the fed the powder to take your right away.
If states can do what they want, what if they do the opposite, and ban all guns? That’s what the nutty government in California would do.
After you have filed your correct elector registration with the county clerk
This is YOUR second KEY to FREEDOM, and Yes, it is this simple.
Remember, always on all forms, you are a Citizen of one of the 50 Countries that makeup this Union (Citizen of Ohio without the state)
Not a US citizen(slave). Sorry anyone born in Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, any Territory, or possession of the United States.
You cannot use this form because you are a slave, and your Plantation Owner is The United States.(Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, any Territory, or possession of the United States).
John Galt
215 Mesa Street
Any town, Ohio [zip]
Date 01/01/2008
Internal Revenue Service
Street Address
City, State [zip]
Dear Mr. Computer:
After further study of the Code.
This is my Statement.
I am not required to file a tax return and I am Exempt.
I was not born in the United States. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, Federal areas, Territories, or possessions thereof)
I am not a US citizen. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, any Territory, or possession of the United States).
I am not a citizen of the United States. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, any Territory, or possession of the United States).
I am not a United States person.
I was born in Iowa. Not in a Territory of the United States.
I have lived in Ohio since January of 2008.
I am a Citizen of Ohio and America. I am an Ohioan and an American.
I do not currently nor have I ever lived in the United States. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, any Territory, or possession of the United States).
Ohio is not a part of the United States. Federal areas inside Ohio are Territories of and a part of the United States.
I do not live in a Federal area, also known as in the State, or within the State, or a Territory of the United States.
I do not live in a State, or any geographical area that is a part of the United States. (Territories or possessions of Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia.)
I am not an officer or an employee of the United States.
I do not work, nor have I ever worked in a Federal area.
Definitions from USCS:
26 USC Sec. 7701 (a)
(9) United States – The term “United States” when used in a geographical sense includes only the States (any Territory or possession of the United States) and the District of Columbia.
(10) State – The term “State” shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.
(30) United States person. The term ‘United States person means-
(A) a citizen or resident of the United States.
(B) a domestic partnership.
(C) a domestic corporation, and
(D) any estate or trust (other than a foreign estate or foreign trust, within the meaning of section 7701(a)(31)).
THE STATES 4 USCS Sec. 110
Sec. 110. Same; definitions
As used in sections 105-109 of this title-
(d) The term “State” includes any Territory or possession of the United States.
(e) The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United States or any department, establishment, or agency of the United States; and any Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State, shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State.
Supreme Court decisions for the States 4 USCS Sec. 105 – Interpretive Notes And Decisions
1. IN GENERAL
2. Purpose
Purpose of Buck Act {4 USCS Sec. 105 et seq.} was to equalize liability for income tax between officers and employees of United States who reside within federal areas and those officers and employees, otherwise identically situated, who reside outside federal areas who had become liable for state tax by passage of Public Salary Tax Act 1939 {Act of April 12, 1939, Ch 59, 53 Stat 574}. United States v Lewisberg Area School Dist. (1976, CA3 Pa) 539 F2d 301.
28 USC Sec. 1746 : Unsworn Declarations Under Penalty of Perjury.
(1) If executed without the United States: “I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the united States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.” Executed on (date). (Signature)
(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.” Executed on (date). (Signature)
Since I was not born, and have never lived, nor have I ever worked in the United States. (Washington D.C. – The District of Columbia, any Territory, or possession of the United States).
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the united States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on 01-01-2008.
All Rights Reserved
Sincerely,
John Galt
If az does away all fed health care, what happens to medicare and medicaid.
Hi Bill
Are you a member of the solar federation? lol
My State is not a subdivision of anything.
Bill – tell me in your own words how you might get confuse, and I will give you the value of the answer….Damn! now I’m really (doubled over.) lol
Rolland Gibson says…
“If az does away all fed health care, what happens to medicare and medicaid.”
And…
I would like to know what happens to all of health care, when the feds take over.
Rolland Gibson,
I’m assuming that the money Az would normally be sending in to support Medicare and Medicaid, would stay in Az and a state health care program would be set up to offset the federal program.
There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution which grants Congress the power to pass laws criminalizing possession of firearms within a State. I don’t see it under Amendment 2 and certainly under Amendment 10.
Therefore being that States,under Amendment 10 are not prohibited from passing firearms laws and other laws I see no reason why the Federal Government should interfere in the actions being taken now by different States claiming their constitutional authority to do so.
Moreover, it must be clearly understood that the so-called “Inter-State Commerce Clause was never meant to grant Congress the power to criminalize or pass legislation to make it illegal any legitimate transportation of good and services legally sold or used within a State.
Finally, the passage of the Amendments to the Constitution basically changed the meaning of the original Constitution and the powers until then vested by Congress. These Amendments removed substantial powers from Congress, making it a useless body, they NULLIFIED the Inter-State Commerce Powers and gave must of the powers to the States and the people.
State can even establish their own Religion under Amendment 1 because they are not prohibited by Amendment 10, likewise they can manufacture Firearms of any kind and pass reasonable legislation for their possession although under Amendment 2 there is no provision for qualification or limitation.
Why? Because States are NOT prohibited by the Constitution.If Congress and their strong arm, the Federal Courts, want to set aside the Constitution then it’s time for telling them to go to HELL.
THIS FEDERAL TYRANNY MUST BE ABOLISHED. Good news from TEXAS.