http://www.wikihow.com/Detect-Lies
Posted on 09/17/2011 6:07:41 PM PDT by RobertClark
SEC. 376. FEDERAL AND STATE IMMUNITY.
(a) Abrogation of State Immunity- A State shall not be immune under the 11th Amendment to the Constitution from a suit brought in a Federal court of competent jurisdiction for a violation of this Act.
(b) Waiver of State Immunity-
(1) IN GENERAL-
(A) WAIVER- A State's receipt or use of Federal financial assistance for any program or activity of a State shall constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity, under the 11th Amendment to the Constitution or otherwise, to a suit brought by
an employee or applicant for employment of that program or activity under this Act for a remedy authorized under Section 375(c) of this Act.
I could not begin to count the number of laws in my lifetime that have sucked sovereignty from the states. Many of them were highway bills (Big Brother says if you don’t do X we’ll cut your highway funding) but this is simply more of a very fast erosion of states rights.
Ping this thread to Mark Levin. What is his name? hold on now?
You have got to be kidding !!!
All we need now is for Nancy to say, “We need to pass the bill, so you can find out whats in the bill ...”
I don’t believe Congress passing laws saying states can lose their sovereign immunity is not new. The laws are phrased the same general way — IF the state chooses to participate in some federal program, then their participation is a voluntary waiver of sovereign immunity.
http://www.wikihow.com/Detect-Lies
“. . . waiver of sovereign immunity”
Don’t these clowns realize that such a statement is logically and legally inconsistent?
NO NO NO! Patently UNCONSTITUTIONAL! States CANNOT be forced to surrender their sovereign immunity without a Constitutional Amendment and the affirmative assent of the People of said State. And the Feds AIN’T gettin’ it — not from South Carolina and a lot of others anyway. NO MORE surrendered rights! STEP BACK WASHINGTON — or get PUSHED BACK!
Thanks not constitutional.
Actually, it happened in 1792 when the Constitution was declared to be in force. Sovereignty is an all or nothing deal - either a state is sovereign, or it is not. Under the Confederacy (1776-1792), the states retained their sovereignty. Under the federal Constitution, the states ceded their sovereignty, but retained some rights of sovereignty under the IX and X amendments.Ynbsp; The XI amendment restored sovereign immunity, but not sovereignty.
I seriously doubt that the Supreme Court would allow an amentment to the Constitution to be overridden by a mere law.
But, for many reasons,
And yes, some states did recover their sovereignty for a short time, when they seceeded from the Federation and formed a second Confederacy.
BTW, the CSA flags had 13 stars. Missouri and Kentucky were claimed| by both the CSA and the USA.
There is some precedent in the tying of highway funds to having a certain drinking age. This, however, is a very broad waiver, only slightly related to the object of the bill. It may be hard to challenge on straight contract theory (cash for action), but there are cases where the ‘true intent’ of a law has been held unconstitutional. The case I have in mind, if I recall correctly, was a ‘tax’ on machine guns that was meant to prohibit them; the Court found that this violated the 2nd Amendment. Likewise, this poison pill might be seen as having a ‘true intent’ of violating the 11th Amendment.
Of course, if no Democrat has the intestinal fortitude to actually introduce this turkey, then we won’t have to worry about it getting passed. Maybe that’s what Barry’s hoping for - an excuse to run against a ‘do-nothing’ congress.
Obama reminds me of the skinny pimply nerd who was constantly getting sand kicked in his face as a kid.
But with Executive Powers he is getting revenge and he isn’t just aiming for the bullies, he is using anything under his command to make America hurt, he lives each and every day planning the next wave of revenge upon everything that has built America.
Black, white yellow or brown it matters not, its all about Obama, the “I won, get used to it” is Public Enemy Number One.
he hates everyone who does not accept his vision of a future perfect America of Islamofascism, where every household will be told how much of their wages they are allowed to keep, he plans to equalize everyone by intimidation.
Whatever we do to fight him we are not doing it enough, he lives yet another day with his hands holding a hammer and a chisel chipping away at our foundation.
No. But they have been doing it "progressively" for a long, long time anyway.
The first President from Illinois got the ball rolling, he is sealing the deal.
Let's be clear it wasn't surrender peacefully, it was taken by the sword and 600,000 paid the price for that evilness. Lincoln was wrong, the North was wrong, and now will will all pay.
Give credit to Louie Gohmert for his brass tacks this week: He filed a bill called the “2011 American Jobs Act” (stealing Obama’s title).
__________________________________________________
And wasn’t Louie’s bill only *TWO* pages long while ovomit’s was hundreds ? Seems I read that here on FR the other day.
We wouldn't. We have towns in the western part of the state with unemployment at 1%, statewide unemployment below 4% and a steady influx of people (the last census is wrong today).
What incentive is there for us to surrender anything, even if it could be legally done?
Obama and the Democrats have created this crisis, subsidized a parasite class which either doesn't work or never has of their own volition, and then tries to bait people into falling for surrendering their freedom for a crust of bread.
See the whole sordid manipulation form the CRA onward for what it is--a concerted effort to destroy our Constitutional Republic.
Obviously they have little helpers in both parties. At some point we must figure out that theses elections are not popularity contests, the very Republic is at risk, if it is not already too late.
RINO's are just traitors by another name. The health care bill could never have became law without the help of some of those RINO's republicans.
The desire to destroy God in the lives of the people is intense and unrelenting, and there a plenty of conservatives on this forum that will tell you that doesn't matter. Well I am here to tell you, with out God we will become property of the government and Soylent Green will be a reality.
Well for sure the Health Care bill does that. I guess it will all come down to what the meaning of "is" is. Without God, we have no rights, since the government will assign them as it pleases. Tell me again now, how social issues don't matter?
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.