Replies

The following info is hard to find.

Right after Obama's inauguration, states started declairing sovereignty to protect themselves from him. It is believed approximately 37 states have passed it or are in legistlature for approval:

Location:
FEDERAL - STATE RELATIONS; GOVERNMENT, STATE;

website opens in new window


May 27, 2009		2009-R-0215
PROPOSED BILLS ON STATE SOVEREIGNTY IN THE UNITED STATES

By: Jillian L. Redding, Legislative Fellow

You asked for a list and the status of legislative proposals introduced in 2009 concerning state sovereignty. You also wanted to know if any of these proposals have been enacted.

SUMMARY

At least 35 states have proposed bills, resolutions, or joint memorials declaring state sovereignty and defining certain activities to be subject only to state law, and not federal regulation. Of these, resolutions have passed both houses of the legislature in four states: Idaho, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. The resolutions are currently with the secretary of state in Idaho, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The governor of Oklahoma vetoed that state's sovereignty bill but the legislature overrode the veto with a concurrent resolution, which is currently before President Obama and Congress. Connecticut is among the 15 remaining states without such a proposed bill this session.

STATE SOVEREIGNTY PROPOSED BILLS

At least 35 states have proposed bills, resolutions, or joint memorials concerning state sovereignty and federal regulation, as shown in Table 1. Each cites the Tenth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution: “[t]he 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. ”

Language of the Passed Bills

The state sovereignty resolutions passed both houses in only four states: Idaho, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. Each resolution:

1. cites the Tenth Amendment and declares that any power not delegated to the federal government is reserved for the states;

2. asserts that the scope of power defined in the Tenth Amendment meant for the federal government to be an agent of the states, however, “in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government”;

3. cites New York v. United States, in which the Supreme Court declared that Congress may not commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states (505 U. S. 144 (1992));

4. states that it is to “serve as a notice and demand to the federal government . . . to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers”;

5. declares that several federal laws violate the Tenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution; and

6. asserts that “proposals from the previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate” the U. S. Constitution (H. J. M. 4, 60thLeg. , 1^st Reg. Sess. (Idaho 2009); H. C. R. 3063, 61st Leg. , Reg. Sess. (N. D. 2009); H. C. R. 1028, 52nd Leg. , Reg. Sess. (Okla. 2009); H. C. R. 1013, 84thSess. (S. D. 2009)).

The resolutions in Idaho, Oklahoma, and South Dakota also state that any legislation that “directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed. ”

Idaho's House joint memorial also states that “Congress has inappropriately delegated its monetary authority to the private federal reserve bank, thus failing to protect and provide a sound monetary system as defined and mandated by the Constitution of the United States, forcing an unstable currency on us resulting in past, and the current, economic perils. ”

South Dakota's House concurrent resolution states that all Congressional acts, judicial orders, and executive orders that assume a power not delegated by the U. S. Constitution “and which serves to diminish the liberty” of a state or its citizens “constitutes a nullification of the Constitution . . . . ”

TABLE 1: STATES' PROPOSED BILLS FOR STATE SOVEREIGNTY INTRODUCED IN 2009

*State*	*Bill Number*	*Status of Bill*
Alabama	House Joint Resolution (HJR) 403	“Pending committee action in chamber of origin” 03/24/09
Alaska	House Bill (HB) 186	House passed 04/16/09 Senate referred to Judiciary Committee 04/17/09
Arizona	House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 2024	Government Committee voted to pass 02/17/09 Rules Committee voted to pass as amended 02/23/09 Failed on the floor to pass with amendment
Arkansas	HCR 1011	“Read third time and failed” 04/03/09
Colorado	Senate Joint Memorial (SJM) 011	“Postponed Indefinitely” by State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee 04/27/09
Georgia	● Senate Resolution (SR) 632 ● HR 773 ● HR 470 ● HR 492 ● HR 280	● Senate passed 04/01/09 ● Still in the House ● Still in the House ● Still in the House ● Still in the House
Idaho	House Joint Memorial (HJM) 004	House & Senate passed; referred to the secretary of the state as of 04/13/09
Illinois	SR 0181	Referred to Assignments Committee 3/31/09
Indiana	● Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 0037 ● SR 0042 ● HCR 0050	● Introduced 02/23/09; no further action ● Introduced 03/19/09; no further action ● Referred to Rules & Legislative Procedures Committee 03/13/09
Iowa	● SCR 1 ● HCR 6	● Referred to Rules & Administration Committee 01/27/09. No further action. ● Laid over under Rule 25 (actions on resolutions must wait one day after being introduced) on 03/02/09. No further action.

Table 1 Continued

*State*	*Bill Number*	*Status of Bill*
Kansas	SCR 1609	Referred to Senate Judiciary Committee 02/12/09; Hearing 03/20/09
Kentucky	HCR 172	Referred to Elections, Constitutional Amendments & Intergovernmental Affairs Committee 02/25/09
Louisiana	SCR 2	Referred to House & Governmental Affairs Committee 5/13/09
Michigan	SCR 0004	Referred to Judiciary Committee 3/03/09
Minnesota	● HF 997 ● SF 1289	● Referred to State and Local Government Operations Reform, Technology and Elections Committee 02/19/09 ● Referred to Judiciary Committee 03/09/09
Mississippi	HCR 69	Amended & Adopted by House 05/07/09 Motion to Reconsider 05/08/09
Missouri	HCR 13	Adopted by House 03/23/09 Senate held Public Hearing 04/07/09
Montana	HR 3	Died in the House, 04/28/09
Nevada	Assembly Joint Resolution 15	Assigned to Elections, Procedures, Ethics, and Constitutional Amendments Committee Bill died 04/11/09 – failed to meet deadline pursuant to Joint Standing Rule 14. 3. 1
New Hampshire	HCR 6	Died in the House, 03/04/09
New Mexico	HJR 27	Bill died “Action Postponed Indefinitely” [no date given]
North Carolina	HR 849	Referred to House Committee on Rules, Calendar, and Operations on 03/30/09.
North Dakota	House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 3063	Passed both houses; filed with the secretary of the state.
Ohio	● HCR 11 ● SCR 13	● Introduced 03/19/09; assigned to State Government Committee ● Introduced 05/07/09
Oklahoma	● HJR 1003 ● HCR 1028	● Both Houses passed; governor vetoed 04/24/09 ● Legislature bypassed governor veto and passed HCR 1028 05/13/09. Currently with President Obama and Congress for consideration.
Oregon	● HJM 17 ● SJM 9	● Referred to Rules Committee 03/12/09 ● Referred to Finance and Revenue Committee 02/23/09
Pennsylvania	HR 95	Referred to State Government Committee 03/23/09
South Carolina	HB 3509	Passed House 02/26/09 Senate referred to Judiciary Committee 03/03/09 Senate recalled from committee and ordered for consideration on calendar 05/14/09

Table 1 Continued

*State*	*Bill Number*	*Status of Bill*
South Dakota	HCR 1013	Both Houses passed as of 03/05/09
Tennessee	● HJR 104 ● HJR 108 ● SJR 311	● Referred to Calendar & Rules Committee 05/19/09 ● Placed on regular calendar for 05/21/09 ● Referred to Judiciary Committee 05/07/09
Texas	● SCR 39 ● HB 1863	● Senate State Affairs Committee as of 03/13/09 ● Public Safety Committee Favorably reported 05/01/09
Virginia	HR 61	Referred to Rules Committee 02/26/09; no action taken in committee by voice vote 02/28/09
Washington	HJM 4009	Referred to State Government & Tribal Affairs Committee 01/30/09
West Virginia	HCR 49	Referred to House Rules Committee 03/27/09
Wisconsin	SR 6	Referred to Ethics Reform and Government Operations Committee 04/09/09

JLR: ak

BUMP!!!!!!!!

Another bttt.

Thanks for the ping, Lady Jag.

FYI, LucyT.

While these state legislatures cite the Tenth Amendment to argue against ever more expansive federal power, let's not forget the the last four words of the Tenth Amendment: or to the people. In other words, state powers are circumscribed too.

Plus, the Constitution never uses the phrase "states' rights." It is a bogus term that we conservatives should drop from our vocabulary. Only individuals and private sector entities have rights. Governments - federal or state or local - have (limited) powers, not "rights."

Bump!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks for the ping, Lady Jag.

Justa, did you see this?

Thanks for the information. Do you suppose the law I’ve suggested would be easier to enact, at least in a couple of states? If so, which states would, in your opinion, be most likely to consider it?

Wisconsin SR 6 Referred to Ethics Reform and Government Operations Committee 04/09/09 JLR: ak

Unfortunately, Doyle the Boil is a despicable NEANDRATHOL!

Is it any wonder months ago, Doyle *Proclaimed* he would not seek re election?

Uhh Doyle?

Do Wisconsin an Un Paid intellectually Honest favor!

Quit!

Release Wisconsin's hard working tax payers from your bondage! I found your *Photo Op* with Ovomit in Milwaukee, outrageous and embarrassing! When you accepted worthless Federal money from a unaccomplished THUG, squating in America's White House, I along with thousands of Wisconsin residents, heaved up collective chunks of undigested rat poison. Sadly, we accepted your corrupt leadership, Mr, Doyle and his Republican/Democratic Minions need to be purged from their cushy corrupt caves.

The sooner the better!

Nice work! I rarely see an accurate representation of all the pending legislation in GA.

Thanks for locating this info, Lady Jag.

Makes me sad to see this about my state: “Failed on the floor to pass with amendment.”