The 10th Amendment Movement
“If the federal government has the exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers, warned the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions’ authors (James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, respectively), it will continue to grow – regardless of elections, the separation of powers, and other much-touted limits on government power.”
–Thomas E. Woods
Nullification: 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
that state is concerned
Current Nullification Efforts:
- 10th Amendment Resolutions
- 10th Amendment Bills
- Firearms Freedom Act
- Medical Marijuana Laws
- REAL ID
- Health Care
- Bring the Guard Home
- Constitutional Tender
- Cap and Trade
- Federal Tax Funds Act
- Sheriffs First Legislation
- Federal Gun Laws
Potential Future Efforts:
- Patriot Act
- No Child Left Behind
- State-Initiated Constitutional Amendments
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
10th Amendment Resolutions
These non-binding resolutions, often called “state sovereignty resolutions” do no carry the force of law. Instead, they are intended to be a statement of the legislature of the state. They play an important role, however. If you owned an apartment building and had a tenant not paying rent, you wouldn’t show up with an empty truck to kick them out without first serving notice. That’s how we view these Resolutions – as serving “notice and demand” to the Federal Government to “cease and desist any and all activities outside the scope of their constitutionally-delegated powers.” Follow-up, of course, is a must.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT 10TH AMENDMENT RESOLUTIONS
^back to top
10th Amendment Bills
Unlike the many 10th Amendment Resolutions that have been introduced around the country since 2008, these “10th Amendment” or “State Sovereignty” bills are proposals for binding legislation. They include language to affirm the sovereignty of the people of the state and to create a commission or a committee to review the Constitutionality of acts emanating from the federal government.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT 10TH AMENDMENT BILLS
^back to top
Firearms Freedom Act
Originally introduced and passed in Montana, the FFA declares that any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states. The FFA is primarily a Tenth Amendment challenge to the powers of Congress under the “commerce clause,” with firearms as the object. (source, FirearmsFreedomAct.com)
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT FIREARMS FREEDOM ACT LEGISLATION
^back to top
Medical Marijuana Laws
An honest reading of the Constitution with an original understanding of the Founders and Ratifiers makes it quite clear that the federal government has no constitutional authority to override state laws on marijuana. All three branches of the federal government, however, have interpreted (and re-interpreted) the commerce clause of the Constitution to authorize them to engage in this activity, even though there’s supposedly no “legal” commerce in the plant. At best, these arguments are dubious; at worst an intentional attack on the Constitution and your liberty.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT STATE MARIJUANA LAWS
^back to top
REAL ID Act
Led by Maine in early 2007, 25 states over the past 2 years have passed resolutions and binding laws denouncing and refusing the implement the Bush-era law which many expressed concerned about privacy, funding and more. While the law is still on the books in D.C., its implementation has been “delayed” numerous times in response to this massive state resistance, and in practice, is virtually null and void.
CLICK HERE FOR ANTI-REAL ID LEGISLATION
^back to top
Health Care
Like Marijuana above, a reading of the Constitution through the original understanding of the Founders and Ratifiers makes it quite clear that any national health care plan, or national public option, is not something that was delegated by the People to the Federal Government in the Constitution. However, the courts, politicians and many commentators have interpreted (and re-interpreted) the Commerce Clause, the general Welfare Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause in ways not intended by the Founders so as to justify such programs under the Constitution. They are most certainly wrong. A number of states are considering legislation to effectively nullify any future national health care plan.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT HEALTH CARE NULLIFICATION LEGISLATION
^back to top
Bring the Guard Home
Under the Constitution, the militia (now called the National Guard) may only be called into duty by the federal government in three specific situations. According to Article I, Section 8; Clause 15, the Congress is given the power to pass laws for “calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.” The militia was intended by the Founders and Ratifiers to be defense force and nothing more. Deployments outside the country were not considered, and neither were internal deployments in pursuance of powers that were not delegated to the federal government. Congress has passed numerous laws in the past 100 years giving the federal government additional authority not mentioned in the Constitution. But, without amendment, altering the enumerated powers by legislative fiat is, in and of itself, unconstitutional. Campaigns in states around the country are working to reassert the authority of governors over guard troops.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT BRING THE GUARD HOME LEGISLATION
^back to top
Constitutional Tender
The United States Constitution declares, in Article I, Section 10, “No State shall… make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.” Constitutional Tender laws seek to nullify federal legal tender laws in the state by authorizing payment in gold and silver or a paper note backed 100% by gold or silver,
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT CONSTITUTIONAL TENDER LEGISLATION
^back to top
Cap and Trade
Cap and Trade is often claimed to be authorized under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. At best, this is a highly dubious claim. This interstate regulation of “commerce” did not include agriculture, manufacturing, mining, or land use. Nor did it include activities that merely “substantially affected” commerce.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT CAP AND TRADE NULLIFICATION LEGISLATION
^back to top
State Sovereignty and Federal Tax Funds Act
Such laws would require that all federal taxes come first to the state’s Department of Revenue. A panel of legislators would assay the Constitutional appropriateness of the Federal Budget, and then forward to the federal government a percentage of the federal tax dollars that are delineated as legal and Constitutionally-justified. The remainder of those dollars would be assigned to budgetary items that are currently funded through federal allocations and grants or returned to the people of the state.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT FEDERAL TAX FUNDS LEGISLATION
^back to top
Sheriffs First Legislation
A “Sheriffs First” bill would make it a state crime for any federal agent to make an arrest, search, or seizure within the state without first getting the advanced, written permission of the elected county sheriff of the county in which the event is to take place.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT SHERIFFS FIRST LEGISLATION
^back to top
Federal Gun Laws Nullification
As codified in law with the 2nd Amendment, the People did not delegate the power to regulate or control the ownership of firearms to the federal government. And, as the 10th Amendment makes clear, all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the States or to the People themselves.
CLICK HERE FOR CURRENT FEDERAL GUN LAWS NULLIFICATION LEGISLATION
^back to top
I'm a firm believer in the 10th Amendment and support your efforts, but I wish you wouldn't give the whole marijuana issue such a prominent place. If states want to legalize marijuana (for *whatever* reason), I agree that should be their choice – although I personally prefer it remain illegal. But, I'm convinced the reason the Libertarian Party has been unable to be competitive is because it is largely identified as the party of legalized drugs and prostitution. That screams "fringe nuts" to most voters. If we just focus on what you have rightly identified as the key, the 10th Amendment, and let the details work themselves out later, we'll have more people joining the cause. And that's the goal, right?
Rick, a few points:
1. If you believe marijuana should be illegal nationally, you are not a constitutionalist. Illegal in your own state, with your state paying for it? That's a different story.
2. We will continue to give this a prominent place, because state regulation of marijuana is constitutional. Federal laws are not.
3. Politicians lie and cover up the truth to make themselves more palatable to people – we do not. We put out the truth and provide people a place to learn about the proper role of the federal government under the constitution. these days, no matter what the issue, there's a mainstream conservative or a mainstream liberal who thinks the position is "fringe" We don't care. It's about doing what's right.
Prople are more likely to consider libertarians fringe because, by ditching pragmatics for dogmatism, they ignore some important implementation problems. Still, they are certainly closer to the ideal than than repulicans or democrats.
Drug laws are in my top 3 worst domestic law categories: they are invasive of privacy, they militarize the police, they justify all sorts of intrusions into voluntary associations.
I’m still against most states’ laws in this area, but it’s up to the people of that state to deal with it. At the federal level, it is just plain unconstitutional.
Check out my new video that promotes states rights!
Defend Freedom – Featuring Judge Andrew Napolitano
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xNaN3pz-ag
I have beem concerned for sometime about this president's plans to raise up a civilian force as strong as our military.
For what reason?? I hope and pray all of the states will join in on th 10th amendment plan. What can we, as individuals do to help, please?
No Constitutional Conventions!!!!! Rescind our TN calls!
I am a grass roots candidate for the office of the president of the United States. I am seeking the collaboration of supports of Consitutionally Restricted Federal Government. My blog: http://patriotword.blogspot.com/ should clarify any doubts about my positions, and their direct relationship to the Constitution of the United States. Please help me promote our cause. The states are sovereignty is obvious, only somone intent on abusing the relationship could see it differently. Please read and help promote my candidacy, if you want to have a friend in Washington.
Rick:
Speaking as one who was very active in the Libertarian Party, until I retired and moved to Mexico, I can say without reservation that legalization of drugs and prostitution is not a central issue for most Party activists. Of course those things are implicit in libertarian principals, but have not recently, in and of themselves, been explicit points of Party activism. The myth that drugs, etc., are the raison d’etre of the LP is largely propaganda spread by Ds and Rs in an effort to marginalize what could easily become effective opposition to their political depredations. (Looks like it worked with you!)
Rather that giving credence to these distortions of fact, why don’t you become active in the LP and learn for yourself what the Party stands for?
Keep up the pressure on your own state's governor and legislators.
See http://bigeye.com/amendment10.htm
Our system of taxation has created one of the most corrupt bodies of government. The taxes collected by the Federal Government are dispersed out to individual States (e.g., pork) that even the most honest congressman cannot deny. The taxation proposal summarized below is revolutionary and totally out of the box. Why does the Federal Government collect revenue from individual citizens then turn around and give it right back to the States? Just cut out the middle man by allowing each State to collect the revenue needed, and then the Federal Government could collect revenue directly from each State based on the number of congressmen the State sends to the HR in D.C. For example, TN sends 9 congressmen to the HR in D.C. That’s 2.07% of the 435 seats in the HR. TN would be required to pay 2.07% of the Federal Government’s expenses for that year. This allows the citizens of TN and the Government of TN to decide how to collect revenues, and reduces State wealth distribution.
This may be a bit premature to ask, but can citizens in a dissatisfied county,municipality or township nullify taxes or legislation passed by a State authority? Are there also provisions for legalized civil disobedience, such as jury nullification–where a jury of one's peers judges the law as well as the facts–where households or even individuals are sovereign, and even the enforcement of local laws may be rendered null and void?
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
National Guard is NOT the Militia
From: https://unitedstatesmilitia.com/forum/showthread….
"The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Report", of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the United States Senate Judiciary Committee; Ninety-seventh Congress, second session, February 1982. Orrin Hatch, Chairman.
"That the National Guard is not the "Militia" referred to in the Second Amendment is even clearer today.
J Clark, your idea would be much less insane than what we have now. Make DC dependent upon the states, the people of which would have greater leverage over DC…esp. if they want to leave the union.
But fat chance of that happening. The welfare statists and militarists would never stand for it; their agendas thrive upon centralized taxation (and central banking, too) and they’ll suspect immediately that tax revenue could be driven down. Maybe arms dealers like Boeing could be persuaded to get on board, but you’ll have to convince them that there would soon be secessionist states to buy their goods, thereby keeping revenues high. Boeing would also be concerned that sales of 787s could be harmed by carriers delaying orders on account of (hopefully) reduced federal spending on air transport infrastructure. Another problem will be businesspeople who fear that the change could be the first step toward a greater decentralization that ruins their precious career opportunities.
David K. Meller, “to nullify taxes or legislation” (1) get involved in electoral politics and agitate for change, (2) just refuse to pay the taxes and shoot any lawman who comes near your home, (3) foment a civil war in the state and federal bar associations, and (4) talk the police and judges out of enforcing the law.
Of course, in the case of the 1st you’ll be steamrolled by the various tax gatherers and their enforcers. The 2nd will turn your home into a Ruby Ridge. The 3rd, my favorite, would require that you to get to know a large number of lawyers and to convince them to refuse to honor their own oath to uphold the law. You’d probably have to convince them that the law is unjustified, in which case their business is criminalistic. Unfortunately, you’d have to talk a lot of lawyers out of a very lucrative business (enforcing laws, in cooperation with the police, who are their muscle) to make dead letters of statute laws. The 4th is what my neighbor, in Chicago, does to avoid paying fines to punish him for his house alarm, which goes off repeatedly at all hours of the day.
On the other hand, you could just wait until the GOP’s hacks are returned to power in greater numbers (as through your activism; see #1), at which point your aversion to irresponsible government will fall in proportion to your gullibility and to the spoils you hope to obtain or retain through GOP activity. This is what most Americans do, proving that Americans are an amoral, conniving, and corrupt people.
As for rendering “local laws” “null and void”: You have assumed that the laws have authority. Read Lysander Spooner’s “No Treason”, nos. 1, 2, and 6, for a compelling argument that the Constitution has no moral or legal authority. His arguments apply well to state constitutions, too. Bear in mind as you read that you could never vote a state into existence without first pretending that one already exists in which to sanction the voting. But that would only invite the question, “how did you vote your state into existence?”.
The Federalists, I suspect, understood this problem full well. So they simply declared the existence of their state of states and called it a republic. This will go down as the greatest political fraud, but at least you had the prideful satisfaction that you were part of humanity’s first interplanetary empire of this solar system.
http://lysanderspooner.org/node/44
I admire and respect the Tomas DiLorenzo immensely but insisting that states’ rights will somehow restore the rights that the feds have taken away is delusional. I do not trust the State I reside in to protect my individual liberties and personal freedoms any more than I trust the federal government to do so. State, county and local governments are just as corrupt, tyrannical and ineffective as the central government is. One of course, could move from state to state looking for liberty like Diogenes looked by lantern light for an honest man. Which states (try to name just one) would have within them, a set of constitutionalist legislators as well as a principled state supreme court with the convictions necessary to secure the inalienable rights of their inhabitants? Nada one!
"Nullification" means the People– not the GOVERNMENT– of a state, refusing to allow a federal law to be enforced within their state's borders.
And this doesn't fit that definition. This is simply state GOVERNMENTS passing laws that are overruled by federal ones.
Brian, that's not entirely true. Nullification in the context of Jefferson and Madison requires state governments to, in essence, outlaw federal acts that are not authorized by the Constitution. In theory, this is to represent the will of the People of that particular state – and then the state is supposed to follow through and interpose – to stand between the federal government and the people. It doesn't matter if the feds overrule the state laws or not. It's the act that matters, the refusal to comply, the state affirming this refusal as agents of the people, and interposing against the feds if they don't recognize this act.
Is there any effort to insert some language into the Tenth Amendment to make its intended meaning crystal clear? What about putting some heat on our own state congressional delegations to begin an Article V amendment process to add a word or two to make sure Congress or the courts can't dance around it's true meaning? Is there any such language out there?
Maryland General Assembly 2010
HJ2 – Maryland Sovereignty Under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Demanding that the federal government halt its practice of assuming powers and imposing mandates on the states of the United States for purposes not enumerated under the Constitution of the United States.
Introduced 01-13-10 (Also read during Tea Party in Annapolis)
http://mlis.state.md.us/2010rs/billfile/hj0002.ht...
power to the people
Basicly the platform of the Lbertarian is for self Goverment , And thats its down fall! Self goverment will never work because we the people have NO self discipline . This is why we are a nation of LAWS . The only fly in the ointment is when the law makers take advantage of the power thay have and take away the freedoms granted by the constitution to the people .The constitution is always the last word that should govern any law made .
Basicly the platform of the Lbertarian is for self Goverment , And thats its down fall! Self goverment will never work because we the people have NO self discipline . This is why we are a nation of LAWS . The only fly in the ointment is when the law makers take advantage of the power thay have and take away our freedoms.
There is a practical problem with trying to nullify every instance of federal usurpation: Most of the approximately 20,000 statutory provisions enacted every year that might create a separate judicial issue are unconstitutional. That does not include all the administrative regulations or actions, or all the federal court decisions, that are also unconstitutional. There is no way either the courts or state legislatures could keep up with that flood of usurpations. Each state needs to put in place a system that can respond faster and respond to more issues than a state legislature can, especially the ones that do not meet in continuous session.
The solution is to create a commission with the attributes of a grand jury, but with the power to find federal actions unconstitutional, and to issue edicts to that effect with the force of law. Their edicts would not be repeals or rescissions of such federal usurpations, but they could mobilize resistance to them by state officials, agents, and citizens.
The proposal is discussed at http://constitutionalism.blogspot.com/2010/01/cau... but here is the core of the proposal:
Proposed Components:
1. Commission. Establish "Federal Action Review Commission" – special commission with grand jury powers to meet continuously with rotating membership drawn from a pool of legal historians and constitutional scholars, appointed by the Governor, Attorney General, or Legislative Council; empowered to review the constitutionality of congressional legislation, or federal regulations or decisions, and if it finds such legislation, regulations, or decisions to be unconstitutional, to issue an edict, with the force of law, requiring that no state or local officials, employees, or contractors cooperate in the enforcement of it, and urging state citizens to refuse to cooperate. This Commission would be established by an amendment to the Texas Constitution.
2. Structure and procedure. The Commission shall consist of 23 members, who shall serve for staggered terms of 4-8 months, drawn at random from a pool of at least 230 constitutional scholars and legal historians, who shall meet for at least one hour once a week, with a quorum of 16, and a vote of 12 required to issue an edict, based on a presumption of nonauthority and requiring strict proof of constitutionality from logic and historical evidence. It shall be open to direct complaints of the unconstitutionality of federal actions from any citizen. It shall have the power to subpoena witnesses, and its deliberations shall be secret, except that it may disclose anything in its presentments. It may authorize criminal prosecution by issuing an indictment to any person, not necessarily a lawyer, upon a finding that the court cited has jurisdiction and that evidence of guilt is sufficient for trial.
3. Penalties. State and local officials, employees, and contractors shall be duly notified in writing of such edicts within ten days and shall have twenty days to comply or be subject to termination after one written warning and a second failure to refuse to cooperate.
4. Funding. Establish a state fund to pay for legal and financial support of state citizens and officials who refuse to cooperate with unconstitutional federal statutes, regulations, or decisions, with the intention to obtain judicial decisions that support the unconstitutionality of the federal actions.
PART ONE
CCAG-SSS
Coalition of Citizen Advocacy Groups in
Support of State Sovereignty
A CCAG Coordinated Project
Barbara Paulus – CCAG Director
Wednesday February 3, 2010
NEWS FLASH
Kansas Tenth Amendment Resolution was Voted out of Committee Today!
Topeka, Kansas. After a long and sometimes tumultuous wait Kansas’ Tenth Amendment resolution, SCR1615 was passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning on a 10 to 1 vote. The resolution, which had been carried over from the 2009 session, had a public hearing on Friday January 15, 2010 in spite of a state budget deficit furlough on Fridays.
Several of the committee members and the chairman, Senator Tim Owens, made note of the significant public interest in this resolution. Senator Owens commented the committee had heard “…the voice of the vocal citizens.” Although he voted for the resolution Senator Owens expressed concern about what the citizen response would be to the resolution’s passing and cautioned “…its non-binding, it doesn’t mean anything. It’s just a voice.”
PART II
Kansas Sovereignty resolution passed Senate now on its way to the full Senate:
Coalition of Citizen Advocacy Groups Supporting State Sovereignty (CCAG-SSS) ("kegs")
According to committee Vice Chairman, Derek Schmidt (R), who is also the Senate Majority Leader, the resolution would likely be out on the Senate floor within two weeks and certainly within three. Good news to the queue weary citizens who have been shepherding the resolution through the murky and often times dangerous internal workings of the committee.
Today’s hearing was attended by over eighty citizens some as far away as Salina and others associated with the “citizens’ grass roots coalition” in attendance. The hearing was also attended by the CCAG-SSS project Co-Coordinators, Sharon Evans and Richard Fry and Assistant Project Coordinator Victoria Coletti. There were 6-8 CCAG-SSS orange t-shirts on scene.
PART III
Kansas Sovereignty resolution passed Senate now on its way to the full Senate:
Coalition of Citizen Advocacy Groups Supporting State Sovereignty (CCAG-SSS) ("kegs")
The citizens’ coalition of 17 diverse conservative groups was organized and a rally held by Co-Project Mangers, Sharon Evans of the November Patriots, and Richard Fry, the Director of Operations for CCAG. Jeff Lewis, F.I.R.E. National Director, provided hearing testimony and spoke at a rally in support of this resolution as did Oklahoma Representative and national state sovereignty leader, Charles Key. The public hearing was attended by 400- 500 citizens and the Coalition of Citizen Advocacy Groups in Support of State Sovereignty‘s (CCAG-SSS) rally was attended by 250-300 citizens.
Sincerely,
For the sake of Liberty,
Sharon Evans Richard
Sharon EvansRichard D. Fry
Project C0-CordinatorProject C0-Cordinator
CCAG-SSSCCAG-SSS
November Patriots3d Continental Congress
KS delegate
Independence Caucus
Assist. State Rep.
Go SC
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/cgi-bin/query.exe?fir...