Ohio Senate Affirms State Sovereignty
29. Sep, 2009 
26 Comments
by Michael Boldin
By a vote of 19-12 today, the Ohio State Senate passed Senate Concurrent Resolution 13 (SCR13). (h/t OhioFreeState.com)
The resolution seeks to “claim sovereignty over certain powers pursuant to the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, to notify Congress to limit and end certain mandates, and to insist that federal legislation contravening the Tenth Amendment be prohibited or repealed.”
If passed by the House of Representatives, Ohio will become the 8th state to have passed such a resolution in 2009. Other states that have reaffirmed their sovereignty are Alaska, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Tennessee.
While sovereignty resolutions do not carry the force of law behind them, supporters say that they are a long-overdue first step in moving the country towards constitutional government.
Charles Key, state representative from Oklahoma and author of that state’s sovereignty resolution, compared these resolutions to a cease and desist notice a landlord gives a non-paying tenant.
“If you’ve got a tenant that’s not paying rent, you don’t just show up one day with an empty truck,” said Key in a recent interview with the Tenth Amendment Center. “First, you serve notice. That’s how we see these resolutions, as a notice to the federal government. And there defintely will be follow up.”
The follow up that Rep. Key is referring to has been popping up all over the country. Legislation that calls upon the Jeffersonian principle of “nullification” has already been advancing a number of causes, and some success has been gained, too.
A state-level rebellion to the Bush-era Real ID act has rendered the law virtually null and void. Thirteen states have passed various marijuana laws in direct contravention to federal laws. Two states have passed laws nullifying some federal gun regulations.
Groups in multiple states are pushing their governments to withdraw their state’s guard troops from Iraq and elsewhere. And people in up to 10 states may have the opportunity to vote on state constitutional amendments effectively banning national health care.
The long-term success of all these efforts remain to be seen, especially with a Federal Judiciary which has not often been too friendly to the Constitutional intent of the Founders and Ratifiers.
But, many supporters point to the growing success on issues like Real ID and Medical Marijuana as examples which prove that with enough state-level resistance, the federal government has no option but to back off, with or without judicial approval.
Read the full text of SCR-13 below:
WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”; and
WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and
WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment signifies that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and
WHEREAS, Today, in 2009, the states are often treated as agents of the federal government; and
WHEREAS, Many federal laws directly contravene the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, We believe in the importance of all levels of government working together to serve the citizens of our country, by respecting the constitutional provisions that properly delineate the authority of federal, state, and local governments; and
WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of the United States and each sovereign state in the Union of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal government may not usurp; and
WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States, states in part, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,” and the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States states that “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”; and
WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court ruled in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states by compelling them to enact and enforce regulatory programs; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court, in Printz v. United States/Mack v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997), reaffirmed that the Constitution of the United States established a system of “dual sovereignty” that retains “a residuary and inviolable sovereignty” by the states. The majority of the United States Supreme Court noted in that case (521 U.S. 898, 921-922):
“As [President] Madison expressed it: ‘[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.’ The Federalist No. 39, at 245.
This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. ‘Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.’ . . . To quote [President] Madison once again:
‘In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.’ The Federalist No. 51, at 323″; and
WHEREAS, A number of proposals by previous administrations, some now pending proposals by the present administration, and some proposals by Congress may further violate the Tenth Amendment restriction on the scope of federal power; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the State of Ohio hereby acknowledges and reaffirms its residuary and inviolable sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and be it further
RESOLVED, That this resolution serves as notice to the federal government as agent of the states, to end federal mandates that are beyond the scope of the constitutionally delegated powers; and be it further
RESOLVED, That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalty or sanction or that requires states to enact legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Clerk of the Senate transmit authenticated copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate of each state’s legislature, and each member of the Ohio Congressional delegation.
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,
This is GREAT! Now, we just need to get the Ohio House on board. I spoke yesterday with Rep. Martin. It seems the Dems in control of the House aren’t ready yet to stand up to the Feds on behalf of Ohioans though the Republican controlled Ohio Senate obviously is. Looks like it might have been a party line vote. Too bad. Change is coming.
Up here in Michigan, the Senate vote was 17 republicans AND 16 democrats in favor. I don’t get how the constitution is seen as a party-line vote. People need to start working on democrat reps and explain to them that thomas jefferson and james madison and sam adams and the rest don’t care about anything but liberty. Parties be damned!
Amen! At least there are some states I can move to if need be since I know my representatives in CA will never go for anything that limits their power.
Now there is change I can believe in!
Let’s get the rest of the union on board…
I wanted to give a special thanks to our friends at OhioFreeState.com – their efforts and news tips make this report possible.
Another quick thank you to CincinnatiTeaParty.org for supporting this resolution and for sending us a email on its passage.
Be sure to call the Senators tomorrow to thank the “yeas” and question the “neas” – this vote shows which Senators are fulfilling their vows to uphold the Constitution.
In the words of Senator Grendel at today’s debate: “Jefferson would smile about this debate. I took an oath not to pick and choose parts of constitution that I uphold.”
YEA VOTES
Carey Cates Faber Gibbs
Gillmor Goodman Grendell Hughes
Husted Jones Niehaus Patton
Schaffer Schuring Seitz Stewart
Wagoner Widener Harris
NEA VOTES
Cafaro Fedor Kearney Miller D
Miller R Morano Sawyer Schiavoni
Smith Strahorn Turner Wilson
If you do call your senators as J astutely suggests, also make sure to request that they sign our 10-4 Pledge.
On a mundane practical matter it seems the state is ill equipped to handle comment from the citizenry. When I attempted to call the Ohio Senate at the telephone number, in the last SCR 13 email, the mail box was full. I think we should encourage the state to set up the infrastructure to allow citizens to be heard. For our voice to be heard, it should actually be heard. Since this probably involves spending money, our state representatives should be anxious to do something.
Our federal government needs to hear the same request. Several times when contacting representatives or senators the response was a phone that continually rang busy, a mechanically answered email or some other response that clearly indicated that I was bothering them.
We the people need to insist on the mechanism that allows us to be heard as well as a direct menthod of introducing our desires as bills and actions in the two federal legislatures.
State sovereignty does not mean state GOVERNMENT– on the contrary, it means that the state's PEOPLE are its sole ruling sovereigns– which means that the state is a sovereign nation equal to any other, and its People have the paramount ruling authority over it to make and enforce laws and policy.
State and federal governments are simply DELEGATES of the People, and the People can overrule them at any time to make laws, form treaties, declare wars, and do anything else that sovereign nations may do by RIGHT.
Until the People of each state recognize and prove their sovereignty, then neither they nor their state can be sovereign.
Hi Vic,
I understand your frustration.
One way that we at TAC have come up with to whip lawmakers into accountability is the 10-4 Pledge, which we think will do much to help the people vote for true statesmen rather than teflon politicians. Just click on ‘10-4 Pledge’ at the top of the page to see what I mean. It will not be an immediate solution, but I have confidence that each of our pledge signers are the types of lawmaker who will gladly listen to your voice.
I agree that these state sovereignty resolutions are a step in the right direction.
However…
The problem remains that state lawmakers foolishly ratified the ill-conceived, anti-state sovereignty 17th Amendment in 1913, essentially destroying the voice of the state governments in the federal Congress. Otherwise, both the federal Senate and state legislatures would be much more effective in fighting constitutionally unauthorized federal taxes (did you hear that California?) and federal government interference in people’s lives.
Finally, the following link should help give people an idea how state sovereignty-ignorant voters have shot themselves in the foot with big, corrupt federal government as a consequence of the ill-conceived, anti-state sovereignty 16th and 17th Amendments.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=199792
I disagree: the problem is that "State sovereignty resolutions," aren't.
Rather, we should look to the VIrginia and Kentucky resolutions, since those authors clearly knew what "sovereignty" means.
"Sovereignty" means the paramount authority to make or enforce laws– which is obviously NOT with the individual state, under the current post-Lincoln regime.
Until sovreignty is recognized and and claimed as the sole privvy of the People of the individual state, then it will belong to the Fed– which will thus be the sole and final judge of its own powers, as it is now.
I am always amazed that the Federal government can ignore the law of the land yet they expect “We the People” to obey every crazy unconstitutional law and regulation that they come up with. Power to the People!
The Constitution does not need state votes to affirm it. It is the base of our country. When people start tearing apart the constitution, then we are headed for some real rocky times. Maybe we are there now. Seems like we are coming full cycle back to our roots. Against big government and tyranny. Not sure what the next steps are, but I have some ideas.
The next and ONLY step, is to simply READ HISTORY, and stop reciting the pledge of a-LIE-gance. The USA is NOT “one nation, indisivible–” and never was; the Constitution was RATIFIED by each state’s sovereign People; and the RETAINED their respective sovereignty– they did not “merge” it into one aggregated nation (as I explain on my website).
Hence, the People of each state can choose to NULLIFY any federal law– or SECEDE from the Union entirely, or anything ELSE that sovereign nations can do.
This utopian fantasy of "a land without sovereigns" is just that– a fantasy; there is ALWAYS a final supreme authority, and if it's not the People of the state, then it's the federal GOVERNMENT, as well as those who elect them– and the Constitution means NOTHING.
However it's not up for question: the people of every state ARE that state's ruling sovereigns– BY LAW.
THIS is what people need to wake up and learn: that
1) their state IS a sovereign nation, just like every other nation on earth;
2) The United States is NOT a nation, except by delegation of the states, and
3) the PEOPLE of each state are its RULING SOVEREIGNS.
Until they champion this fact, it's not going to change.
"If you’ve got a tenant that’s not paying rent, you don’t just show up one day with an empty truck,” said Key in a recent interview with the Tenth Amendment Center."
Correct- and if you don't own the building, you don't do ANYTHING– EVER.
The people of the states have got to first PROVE that they OWN their states– i.e. that their states are SOVEREIGN NATIONS, of which THEY are the ruling sovereigns.