Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

North Dakota statehood called into question
Grand Forks Herald ^ | July 13, 2011 | Ryan Johnson

Posted on 07/15/2011 11:30:51 AM PDT by CalinectesSapidus

North Dakota earned its star on the American flag on Nov. 2, 1889, becoming the 39th or 40th state as it was admitted to the union along with South Dakota — or maybe not.

Grand Forks resident John Rolczynski, 82, said he has discovered a flaw in North Dakota’s Constitution that he believes means the state is technically still a territory more than a century after its statehood was approved by Congress and authorized by the president.

He noticed the flaw on Jan. 31, 1995, and soon set out to notify judges, lawmakers and federal authorities, even sending a letter to President Bill Clinton, and said his concerns were largely ignored.

(Excerpt) Read more at grandforksherald.com ...


TOPICS: Government; US: North Dakota
KEYWORDS: called; dakota; north; northdakota; question; state; statehood

1 posted on 07/15/2011 11:30:53 AM PDT by CalinectesSapidus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

Lucky them if they can get out from under this government’s thumb.


2 posted on 07/15/2011 11:35:09 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

Dear Lord,

If You should allow me to live into my eighties, please guide my thoughts and actions that I don’t waste the precious years You gave me in being an obnoxious pimple on the butt of society.

In Jesus’ precious name,
Amen.


3 posted on 07/15/2011 11:35:45 AM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

Dont fight it, ND!

Become the Peurto Rico of the north, or just declare independence.


4 posted on 07/15/2011 11:37:08 AM PDT by VanDeKoik (1 million in stimulus dollars paid for this tagline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

Now’s your chance, ND’ers !

Form your own Free Nation, separate from this 0bamanation while you still can !


5 posted on 07/15/2011 11:37:27 AM PDT by repentant_pundit (Maybe THIS summer will finally be the "Summer of Recovery")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

Yeah, I am afraid that is all this amounts to, but if he is right they would not have to secede to avoid the abominations the Democrats have tossed on the rest of us .

I might even think of moving there if I can get enough fuel to keep me warm.


6 posted on 07/15/2011 11:39:41 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

That means every vote the North Dakota Senators ever voted on is void!


7 posted on 07/15/2011 11:41:58 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

If this is successful, then is the income tax valid?


8 posted on 07/15/2011 11:43:23 AM PDT by Ingtar (Together we go broke (from a Pookie18 post))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

We all know that the alleged creation of West Virginia was unconstitutional.


9 posted on 07/15/2011 11:43:36 AM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: repentant_pundit

Moving to ND yesterday if that actually happens


10 posted on 07/15/2011 11:46:34 AM PDT by Crazieman (Feb 7, 2008 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1966675/posts?page=28#28)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

Seeing as there is a big oil and natural gas boom going on in ND right now - that shouldn’t be a problem. Rename themselves to North Dakotastan and keep the oil royalties to themselves - all 675,000 of them or whatever. (Alaska on the Red River).


11 posted on 07/15/2011 11:47:11 AM PDT by 21twelve (Obama Recreating the New Deal: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

ND is one of the 3/4 of the states that ratified the 16th amendment. By all means, don’t fight this and we all win.


12 posted on 07/15/2011 11:47:15 AM PDT by Ingtar (Together we go broke (from a Pookie18 post))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

Do we get to keep the ICBM’s that we still have?


13 posted on 07/15/2011 11:47:24 AM PDT by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar

I was wondering the same thing. Maybe they can get a rebate on their past federal income tax paid...


14 posted on 07/15/2011 11:48:07 AM PDT by CalinectesSapidus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus; Pan_Yan

So, if you were born before the final change to the state’s Constitution and acceptance into the Union, are you a Natural Born Citizen of the US or not?


15 posted on 07/15/2011 11:48:29 AM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Utopia is being foisted on Americans for their own good.-- J. Robert Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

Well, West Virginia is a special case since Virginia was in open rebellion against the United States at the time and depending on your point of view, was part of a foreign nation and was not subject to the Constitution of the United States. Under those circumstances, the Congress didn’t need the permission of some foreign nation’s legislature. It would be like checking in with England first before admitting Ohio.

The West Virginians said “Hey, we’re not associating with those people. If Virginia’s out, we’ll replace her.”


16 posted on 07/15/2011 11:51:33 AM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

I meant invalid for all of us. They were one of the minimum number of ratifying states.


17 posted on 07/15/2011 11:53:08 AM PDT by Ingtar (Together we go broke (from a Pookie18 post))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

“It would be like checking in with England first before admitting Ohio.”

I’m all for expelling Ohio!


18 posted on 07/15/2011 11:56:24 AM PDT by brownsfan (I miss the America I grew up in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Click the Magic Fairy Dust!

Your Fairy Godmum Isn't Going to Help
It's Up to You


Give what you can
Or donate monthly, and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10

19 posted on 07/15/2011 11:59:12 AM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus

So that’s what my friend meant when he told me there was no such thing as ‘North Dakota’ in 1973. He was from South Dakota and when I mentioned North Dakota he simply replied, “There is no such place.” and would not elaborate. I have been puzzled ever since...............


20 posted on 07/15/2011 12:03:55 PM PDT by Red Badger (PEAS in our time? Obama cries PEAS! PEAS! when there is no PEAS!..........................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

>>Well, West Virginia is a special case since Virginia was in open rebellion against the United States at the time and depending on your point of view, was part of a foreign nation and was not subject to the Constitution of the United States. Under those circumstances, the Congress didn’t need the permission of some foreign nation’s legislature. <<

The flaw in your argument is that the Yankee government NEVER recognized the Confederacy as a separate nation. WV was created out of VA’s sovereign territory; which violated the Constitution. But then, Presidents from IL seem to have a problem with understanding and upholding the Constitution.


21 posted on 07/15/2011 12:04:02 PM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

Mere technicalities. The way to secede is like South Carolina did.


22 posted on 07/15/2011 12:05:14 PM PDT by screaminsunshine (Socialism...Easier said than done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: repentant_pundit

If north Dakota can do this, then I propose all those Midwestern states all the way down to Texas form a new country. They can call it Ameristine.


23 posted on 07/15/2011 12:12:34 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (As long as the MSM covers for Obama, he will be above the law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

Been there did that got frostbite an trenchfoot all in same day.... Strategic Air Command...SAC trained killer, frozen till needed.

Why not Minot .....not !

Way past stompin snow snakes an such....:o)

Stay safe !


24 posted on 07/15/2011 12:14:04 PM PDT by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But have a plan to kill everyone you meet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CalinectesSapidus
It's a complete non-starter. The Constitution requires State officials to take the oath. The Supremacy Clause implies that a State Constitutional or statutory requirement would only be redundant, or -- if it denied the requirement -- invalid.

In other words, State officials who don't take the oath are simply in violation of the law. That doesn't make their state a Territory. It's ridiculous. He was not taken seriously by anybody because he's not a serious person.

25 posted on 07/15/2011 12:18:11 PM PDT by FredZarguna (If you believe that only eyewitness to murder constitutes proof, you are being unreasonably stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: screaminsunshine
The way to secede is like South Carolina did.

Yeah. That worked out well.

26 posted on 07/15/2011 12:19:57 PM PDT by FredZarguna (If you believe that only eyewitness to murder constitutes proof, you are being unreasonably stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
So, if you were born before the final change to the state’s Constitution and acceptance into the Union, are you a Natural Born Citizen of the US or not?

Yes. Barry Goldwater settled that question 50 years ago.

27 posted on 07/15/2011 12:23:44 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Party_Animal

short answer is no, the weapons are subject to US jurisiction and under the terms of the SALT treaties
would not be able to be transferred to another country.


28 posted on 07/15/2011 12:24:32 PM PDT by RitchieAprile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

I’ve always hoped North and South Dakota would set aside their differences and join up to become just Dakota


29 posted on 07/15/2011 12:40:04 PM PDT by outofsalt ("If History teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey

Right. That’s why I wrote “depending on your point of view.” And that is the flaw. But at the time there was nobody to object but a legislature in rebellion. And they had other things to worry about than the population beyond the mountains. They made their move the the US took advantage. Were I in the government at the time, I probably wouldn’t have bothered checking in with Virginia’s legislature either.


30 posted on 07/15/2011 12:42:53 PM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RitchieAprile
Well...it's not quite as easy as you describe.

From Wiki:

Ukraine had 220 strategic weapon carriers on its territory, including 130 RS-18 (SS- 19), 46 sophisticated RS-22 missiles, and 44 strategic bombers carrying 1,068 long-range cruise missiles. In November 1993, the Ukrainian parliament adopted a resolution On the Ratification of the Treaty Between the USSR and USA On the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Weapons of June 7, 1991 and the Protocol to the Treaty of May 23, 1992. The next stage was the signing on January 14, 1994 of the Trilateral Statement by the Presidents of Ukraine, Russia, and the United States under which Ukraine was to destroy all nuclear weapons on its territory, including strategic offensive weapons.

Ukraine, Washington and Moscow reached an agreement in January that allowed for the dismantling of Ukraine's 176 Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBMs) ahead of Kiev's formal ratification of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). France and China provided unilateral security assurances in the form of diplomatic notes. The missiles—130 SS-19's and 46 SS-24's—carried about 1,800 nuclear warheads altogether.

Before voting on accession, Ukraine demanded from Russia, the USA, France and the United Kingdom a written statement that these powers undertook to extend the security guarantees to Ukraine. Instead security assurances to Ukraine (Ukraine published the documents as guarantees given to Ukraine[3]) where given on 5 December 1994 at a formal ceremony in Budapest (known as the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances[4]), may be summarized as follows: Russia, the UK and the USA undertake to respect Ukraine's borders in accordance with the principles of the 1975 CSCE Final Act, to abstain from the use or threat of force against Ukraine, to support Ukraine where an attempt is made to place pressure on it by economic coercion, and to bring any incident of aggression by a nuclear power before the UN Security Council.

Ukraine was scheduled to submit its instruments of accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear state and formally enter into START at the OSCE summit in Budapest in December 1994. The Rada resolution on accession to the NPT, however, was ambiguous as to whether Ukraine was acceding as a nuclear or non-nuclear state, which was unacceptable to the Russians. The compromise reached after intense negotiations was to attach a diplomatic note from the Ukrainian president to the Rada resolution stipulating that Ukraine was acceding as a non-nuclear state.

31 posted on 07/15/2011 12:54:06 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey; cotton1706
the Yankee government

The "Yankee" government was the government of the United States of America. Not even Jefferson Davis disputed that claim.

NEVER recognized the Confederacy as a separate nation.

NO COUNTRY ON EARTH recognized the "Confederacy" as a separate nation.

WV was created out of VA’s sovereign territory; which violated the Constitution.

This is your opinion, but it is not the opinion of the people of West Virginia, or the Supreme Court of the United States. Article IV Section 3 makes clear that new states may be formed from existing States by acts of their legislature. The legislature of Virginia declared itself void by its act of secession. The Wheeling Convention was therefore legitimate to represent the people of Virginia. It did so, and announced the formation of a new State in compliance with Article IV Section 3. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, and the admisssion of West Virginia was ratified by Congress.

The theory that the Constitution was a compact among States which retained their rights to remove themselves from it was settled when the various armies in rebellion surrendered. You can refight that war if you wish, but that won't change the historical outcome, nor invalidate decisions of the Supreme Court, nor acts of Congress.

32 posted on 07/15/2011 1:01:02 PM PDT by FredZarguna (If you believe that only eyewitness to murder constitutes proof, you are being unreasonably stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

“That means every vote the North Dakota Senators ever voted on is void!”

No, but maybe everything one or both of them voted on that passed by a single or a couple votes.


33 posted on 07/15/2011 1:05:26 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

“depending on your point of view, was part of a foreign nation and was not subject to the Constitution of the United States”

The point of view of the U.S. government was and is that it was a state all along. That’s why they were fighting a war with it, duh.


34 posted on 07/15/2011 1:08:33 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: screaminsunshine

“The way to secede is like South Carolina did”

You mean by giving a much larger and more sophisticated entity an excuse to crush you?


35 posted on 07/15/2011 1:12:39 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

If you are going to secede secede. Otherwise stand and deliver. I am starting to study the Constitution. There is no reason to secede and every reason not to when you begin to understand it.


36 posted on 07/15/2011 1:18:27 PM PDT by screaminsunshine (Socialism...Easier said than done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife

The Dakota Territory was an organized, incorporated territory. This means it was a fully integrated part of the national territory of the United States. All provisions of the Constitution fully applied there. Every person born there was a natural born citizen, except Indians.

Until the Constitutionally questionable Insular Cases, in the early 20th Century, there was never a question that the residents of all territories were fully defined as citizens just as were the citizens of each State.

The insular cases created the constitutionally questionable distinction between incorporated territory and unincorporated possessions.


37 posted on 07/15/2011 5:58:03 PM PDT by GreenLanternCorps ("Barack Obama" is Swahili for "Jimmy Carter".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GreenLanternCorps

It was a poor attempt at a joke. :)

But, I do appreciate you taking the time to share more information about citizenship with me.


38 posted on 07/15/2011 6:09:57 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Utopia is being foisted on Americans for their own good.-- J. Robert Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane; nickcarraway

No, a technical irregularity will not void a states admission, it did not for Ohio in 1953, it will not for North Dakota in 2011.

Every act by North Dakota’s government and Congressional delegation is fully lawful. One missing word cannot void the clear will of the Congress and the people of North Dakota.


39 posted on 07/15/2011 6:15:19 PM PDT by GreenLanternCorps ("Barack Obama" is Swahili for "Jimmy Carter".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife

I kinda got the joke, but I’ve seen people (not on this forum) try to argue that territorial residents and even Washington, DC residents were not citizens, when that clearly was not the founders intent.

Don’t even get me started on the insular cases...


40 posted on 07/15/2011 6:27:07 PM PDT by GreenLanternCorps ("Barack Obama" is Swahili for "Jimmy Carter".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

Just because everybody says something is right, doesn’t make it right. The Supreme Court has been wrong n so many cases that it is laughable to cite them as supreme anything (see Dred Scott, Roe v. Wade, Wickard v. Filburn, Kelo v. City of New London, etc.)


41 posted on 07/16/2011 2:24:02 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey
Right. For example: Just because slave owners and their apologists claim the Civil War wasn't about slavery doesn't make it so. It was about slavery.

Just because slave masters and their apologists claim the cotton States had the "right" to secede, that doesn't make it so.

And of course, just because slave owners and their sympathizers claim West Virginia had no right to secede from Virginia (an interesting contradiction, since they think Virginia had the right to secede to begin with) that doesn't make it so, either.

But in fact, the people of West Virginia acted according to the US Constitution. The people of Virginia didn't. Saying they didn't doesn't make it right, either.

42 posted on 07/16/2011 11:44:56 AM PDT by FredZarguna (Long distance electrodes shot into the pineal and pituitary gland of the recently dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson