How to legally dissolve the U.S. Federal Government (Forget Secession)

Nolan Chart ^ | July 22, 2009 | Skip Sanders

[broken_arrow1]

Thirty four (34) is the number of Legislatures from the several States necessary to call a States Convention or a Constitutional Convention. This also known as an Article Five(5) Convention, or a Convention to Amend the U.S. Constitution. With fifty (50) States in the U.S. Federal Compact today, thirty four (34) is the Constitutional number of legislatures from the several States needed to cross the threshold for such a convention.

Let's look at Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution :

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. "

Thirty eight (38) is the number of legislatures from the several States that is necessary to ratify and thus amend the U.S. Constitution after such a convention. This amendment could be "to dissolve". By "dissolve" I mean the whole compact between the several States. Yes, the entire Federal Government and every thing it has or was created under it's jurisdiction. This would include but is not limited too, the Federal Debt, the Federal Reserve Bank, the FDIC, the Department of Education, the Department of Homeland Security, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marines, etc. etc... Think of it as a Constitutional self destruct mechanism.

This would leave the fifty (50) several States and the numerous Federal Territories, sovereign and under their own rightful and direct jurisdiction. Of course each State or Territory would then be free to individually or in groups engage in new compacts and trade arrangements. That is up to them to decide at a further date.

I know this information is very powerful and the far reaching ramification of such a decision may be a little hard for the reader to grasp or understand at first glance. I openly admit that I am not capable of understanding all the possibilities or consequences of such a decision. That being said, please allow me to entertain some ideas that immediately come to mind.

The Federal Reserve and Federal Reserve Notes are gone. The National Debt under the Federal Governments' promise to pay, evaporates Of course the IRS and all Federal Taxes. Social Security , Medicare and all that has been promised, owed or collected. Any claim to Federal Park Lands, highways, military bases, equipment, buildings, assets of any kind inside the several States. Any and all Federal agreements or treaties such as NATO, the UN, WTO, NAFTA,CAFTA, GAT and so on. I invite the readers to speculate and comment on any of the challenges or possibilities that could result if such a course was taken.

I will leave you with this final thought, "That which has been created can NOT be greater than the creator." It is time for the people through their several State Governments assert their power over the Federal Government over which they created. 100% Legally with pen and paper!

[broken_arrow1]

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. -Declaration of Independence 1776

[knarf]

bump for deep musing

[clamper1797]

Too late for that ...

[volunbeer]

1-3 more SCOTUS Justices for this marxists administration and this becomes an insurmountable obstacle to my fervent wish and desire for your suggestion that is constitutionally viable (until SCOTUS says it’s not). Frankly, I doubt we could defeat the supremacy clause now but that defeat is certain with 4 more years of Obama.

[cripplecreek]

I agree, the states are the key.

[MasterGunner01]

The states may well be the key, BUT they are firmly attached to the FedGov money spiggots. If they throw out FedGov, the money goes away. This is the equivalent of taking a methamphetamine abuser or cocaine addict off their dope. It would be VERY unpleasant which is why very few politicians have the spine or cajones for this kind of act.

[Maceman]

A COostitutional convention would be a disaster of the first order.

The convention will be dominated by those who agree with SCOTUS Judge Ginsberg, who would swap the US Constitution for a combination of the UN Declaration if Human Rights and the South African Constitution.

A convention may make sense in a time when people basically still support the Constitution. But now we have an administration and a Democrat party who actively disavow the Constitution, and often say so in so many words.

We have a president who explicitly and publicy states that blames the Constitution for his own failures.

Let’s secure the existing Constitution as the foundational legal document of this nation, before we go mucking around with it.

[Pollster1]

The Federal Reserve and Federal Reserve Notes are gone. The National Debt under the Federal Governments' promise to pay, evaporates Of course the IRS and all Federal Taxes. Social Security , Medicare and all that has been promised, owed or collected. Any claim to Federal Park Lands, highways, military bases, equipment, buildings, assets of any kind inside the several States. Any and all Federal agreements or treaties such as NATO, the UN, WTO, NAFTA,CAFTA, GAT and so on. I invite the readers to speculate and comment on any of the challenges or possibilities that could result if such a course was taken.

I disagree with a few details here. First, the Constitution includes one sentence that established the United States with exceptionally strong credit: "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation." They accepted the valid debts from the Articles of Confederation based on a moral obligation. If we want support from 34 states to dissolve the Constitution, we need voters in 34 states backing that action. Considering how many individuals hold T-Bills and Government bonds, either directly or in retirement accounts, it's potentially worth the money to buy those votes by agreeing to satisfy those debts. Further, to the extent that those debts are valid, we have a moral obligation to satisfy those debts even if there is no political need to do so. Perhaps the answer is to divide the debts among the states in proportion to population.

Regarding your larger suggestion, I have no objection to a Constitutional Convention to either restate the Constitution and remove the potential for misunderstanding the fact that it limits the power of the central government, or to dissolve the Union. Either attempt is a risky option, but so is remaining under a Constitution that is being weakened and corrupted by thugs.

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

And the “self-destrcut” method would not be needed if we had a majority of constitutionally conservative (originalist) governors in the States.

And, with the will to continue the agreement of a representative republic; IOW, have a spine!

[originalbuckeye]

I am truly clueless on this but, don’t the States send more money to DC than they get back?

[Brilliant]

The problem with a Constitutional Convention is that you don’t know what kind of mischief they will perpetrate after it begins.

[varon]

How to legally dissolve the U.S. Federal Government (Forget Secession)

Invite all their sorry a**es to a pool party in a lime pit!!!

[cripplecreek]

The states may well be the key, BUT they are firmly attached to the FedGov money spiggots. If they throw out FedGov, the money goes away. This is the equivalent of taking a methamphetamine abuser or cocaine addict off their dope. It would be VERY unpleasant which is why very few politicians have the spine or cajones for this kind of act.

I agree and we need to look at ways of dealing with it. I think the resources of the individual states could play an important part if we're willing to ignore unconstitutional federal regulations and restrictions. My state of Michigan sits atop a sea of natural gas, has the world's purest copper, has vast forests for logging and grows a lot of fruits and vegetables.

[geologist]

There are several States that could not make it on their own. 4 or 5 states have most of the people. At one time we divided North and South, we could add East and West and perhaps have 4 large areas ... A la South America style. Several areas united but separate from the other groupings ...

Russia is like this now, isn't it?

Something to think about ...

[cripplecreek]

We don’t need a constitutional convention, what we need is a states vs fed confrontation.

I’d love to see a situation where a few states entered a trade contract while shutting the feds out and ignoring the interstate commerce clause.

What could the feds do aside from cutting highway funds (just one example) If Michigan offered up 1000 tax free tons of the world’s purest copper to Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana? The feds trying to blockade the shipments would likely lead to retaliation from other states.

[cripplecreek]

We don’t need separation, we need the federal government to return to its rightful place and role.

[cripplecreek]

We don’t need separation, we need the federal government to return to its rightful place and role.

[geologist]

Right! I completely agree. We have been going the wrong direction for a long time now.

Have you noticed? Something must change.

[MrBambaLaMamba]

Civil War - How bad could it be?
Once you kill off the mob, the socialists will capitulate.
Of course the surrendered socialists will all have to be destroyed and no one will have the courage to see that through. In a short time they will re-name themselves and be back in business.

[oldfart]

The last such convention was supposed to simply fix some problems with the Articles of Confederation. By the time it was over we had a Republic and look what that has brought us. I’d be very wary of a Con-Con.