Skip to comments.STATES' RIGHTS IS OUR LAST HOPE (vanity)
Posted on 06/28/2012 6:06:28 PM PDT by A Navy Vet
While it's now established law that the Fedgov can dictate to American citizens to purchase products/services they don't want OR suffer an additional tax, there was some curtailment to the ever over-reaching "commerce clause". That's a good thing. It's been abused for decades but this decision gives the States some leeway.
As I see it, our only hope is that enough States get together and NULLIFY this tax/mandate decision. Then what would the current/future Executive Branch do? Send in the military to enforce against the States? Not likely. Even Obambi doesn't have the nerve to try that and force a State versus Fedgov conflict. No one has the stomach for a new Revolution nor a Civil War II.
With hold tax money to the States? Okay, that could happen. That's one option for the Fedgov, but the States can also refuse to forward collected taxes. Again, what what the Fedgov do?
Don't forget there are already some 3 States that have passed State laws against Obambacare. There were 26 States opposing Obamacare in this suit. If those 26 (or even less) decide to opt out, Obamacare will fall financially. Of course that issue will work its way through the courts, also. Still, if the Governors of those states just say no NOW, the Fedgov will have a difficult time building its healthcare leviathan.
I see our only hope is from State Governors NULLIFYING this USSC decision and refusing to cooperate. There are no other remedies unless we maintain the House, get a filibuster proof Senate, and a President that will sign a repeal. I doubt the Senate super-majority will happen and don't trust Romney to sign such. Tell me where I'm wrong.
Do you live in Arizona?
The states are pretty much always our best hope.
No, although I'm looking to move their within the next six months. Although they just got screwed by the DOJ telling them the Fedgov will no longer cooperate considering illegals, Arizona is still the cutting edge for States' Rights and anti-illegal reform.
Chief Justice Robers and his cohorts effectively rendered the 10th amendment null and void with their SB1070 ruling. States rights no longer exist.
"Shut up and eat your broccoli." - Barack Hussein Obama, 2012
Sorry, we lost that in 1865.
You make good points. One correction...the Senate can repeal the Affordable Care Act with a simple majority or just 51 Senators..Obamacare was passed with a simple majority because Reid and the Democrats changed the rules.
The Principles of '98 would allow individual states to judge the constitutionality of central government laws and decrees, and could refuse to enforce laws it deemed unconstitutional. Unfortunately, no other states went along and seven state legislatures formally rejected the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions while three other states expressed disapproval. Several of these states asserted that the federal judiciary, not the states, is the proper forum for interpreting the Constitution. In 1803 the Marbury v. Madison case established the principle of judicial review by the US Supreme Court.
As seen in today's (and many other) US Supreme Court decisions, the restraints on the Federal government have become minimal to nonexistent. Maybe it is time for the Principles of '98 to be formally ensconced in the Constitution. Yes, I know, the 10th Amendment should suffice, but if the arbiter of whether it is sufficient is the US Supreme Court then clearly we need another route. Forget the Tea Party, we need a "Spirit of '98" movement for a constitutional convention to reign in the Federal government.
I’m basically rambling here, but you got me talking.
Since it’s now a tax, we can repeal at least the mandate with a simple senate majority of 51. Without that mandate Obamacare becomes even more financially untenable than it already is. And with that we can maximize the compulsion to repeal it entirely.
It’s absolutely critical that Republicans win as many Senate seats as possible. No thanks to Alaska and Nevada who didn’t exactly help the situation with their recent election of Dems.
We have to give the Republicans as much power as possible in the upcoming election, so that they have the tools to stop this. No foolish defections to 3rd parties at this time. If the Republicans then fail to stop Obamacare in 2013, then the Republicans will have proven their uselessness and I will look at supporting the growth of a 3rd party. But this is not the time to go through that transition, the Reps are our best hope to save the country at this immediate juncture. If we fail in this election, it’s over.
Come 2014-2016, if Obamacare Socialism becomes permanently entrenched, on top of all the other federal abuses, my loyalty to this govt will wane rapidly and I will consider the country I know to be dead. The Constitution no longer exists, Washington has become a ruling class of outright tyranny over the rest of the country. Not a single branch of govt remains that actually obeys the words written. They consider themselves clever at crafting tortured rationale to justify unlimited Federal power, while holding the peoples’ and states’ rights to be specific and tightly enumerated. The exact opposite of the strict constructionist reading which is specified in the 10th Amendment.
As I’ve seen this former Constitutional Republic slip away, I am not far from losing faith in this country. When the Constitution is lost, there comes a point where only Revolution can save our liberty. It’s getting to where I no longer fear the possibility of a future Revolution. What I fear is that the people and states won’t start one. Throughout human history, people only have as much freedom as they are willing to fight for.
I agree that if, in the future, several states were to take a bold stand against the Federal government, there would not be a war, but more likely a peaceful secession. The key is the feds would have to know that the citizens of those states are willing to start shooting if pressed. If they are convinced of that, then they will shy away. Nothing resembling the Civil War would be politically tolerated in today’s rapid media culture. And who would really support the idea of militarily ravaging a state to force it to stay in the Union? We don’t have the slavery boogeyman to justify that this time around.
What you say about the 1798 Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions is interesting. I will have to look into that, I’m not familiar with them.
Failing that, we need to re-pass the 10th Amendment, but this time put it in all capital letters.
Amendments are difficult, how about a law prescribing the oath of office for judges that specifically includes fealty to the 10th Amendment.
Just to clarify things for the robed dopes in this country.
Wrong ace. The forest of the republic was burned down 150 years ago. The forest has since regenerated.
The States lost their rights 150 years ago. WTF are you talking about? The federal government dictates to the states in almost every way today from gas tax mandates to medicare mandates to interstate commerce. WTF are you talking about?
The right of secession cannot be given or taken away. It just exists. Fedgov will be humbled one day. What I meant is that the concept was trampled on 150 years ago, but the reasons that necessitate it have grown back 100 fold since then. We are more divided now than in 1860, by far.
Until Obamathug decides to pull all funding from any state that doesn’t bow down to him. You can also bet he’s investigated every governor and has dirt on them. One phone call and each state will cave like dominoes.
Clearly you are an amateur when it comes to this. I come from a long line of rebs. Here’s what you do: You want to secede and send a peace delegation to DC, with doves and unicorns. Of course President Caesar Obama will reject the parlay but then when the lead flies it looks like they are the bad guys.
Reb, you come from a long line of losers. Do something right for a change. Listen to me. We’re going to have far more people willing to either hang the bastards or vote them out. I prefer the former. I like my country as it is. What I don’t like, what I hate is Obama and what he’s done.
And if there ever were yet another fight for independence from Mexica, I'd like to see Texas at the front of it once again - remember the Alamo, La Bahia and San Jacinto!
But it also seems to that since the Supremes ruled that this is a tax, they can repeal it as a tax with just 51 Senators (plus the House and President.)
Unless enough States say they do exist and NULLIFY this ruling. Let's see what the Governors of the 26 States who sued the Fedgov have to say.
Maybe you missed my point that States' Rights were upheld even in this awful ruling. The Fedgov has now been limited on how it abuses the "commerce clause", even if to a small extent. I foresee many lawsuits in favor of States's rights, depending on the issue.
And no, I don't think that Roberts had that in mind for future rulings. But he, and the liberals on the court set precedence. They now have to live with it, until its over-ruled by a future Supreme Court.
You are probably thinking about secession...I'm not. I'm talking about the Individual States just not cooperating with a legislative law. That is nullification.
Plus, this is not the 1860's. No one in this age has the stomach for such. If enough States say they won't play to Obama's over-reach of their rights, then that will be the beginning of the end of absolute Fedgov control.
No one is going to civil or revolutionary war over this. It will be a matter of gamesmanship and who politically backs down first. I believe it will be the Fedgov, providing enough States are involved.
Arizona, Georgia (Alabama?) and many others have and are going to pass laws against Obambicare. Plus, many have and are passing laws against illegal immigration. Plus, many are passing new CCW and/or open carry laws. The States are currently re-enforcing their rights as I read almost every day.
The States are fed up. They are on the move. I really doubt that the some 26 States that sued the Fedgov over Obamacare are going to go "quietly into the good night" without a fight.
Again, the USSC gave the States (probably unknowingly) quite a weapon against Fedgov control with the majority opinion of over-reach for the "commerce clause". Here is our chance to reassert States' Rights!
I appreciate your post. I appreciate that some states are fighting back. I like the trend.
All I meant is that since the Civil War, the states have lost most of their sovereignty, and I’m sure I don’t need to explain this to you.
How many of the 50 states can tell the USA that they refuse to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act in forcing businesses to add handicap ramps for buildings and little wheelchair ramps for curb intersections? None, I think.
How many can tell the EPA that you can fill in a wetland with impunity? None I think.
How many states can tell the EPA to go stuff it and that they aren’t going to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty? None I think.
EPA is preventing drilling for oil in some states and coal exploration in others.
How many state can ban abortion? I understand none can as this was codified as a 1st amendment right in Roe.
This is what I meant when I said the states haven’t had rights since the Civil War. The amount of true state sovereignty is very very small today relative to the pre-civil war era. That is all I meant.
If I am wrong about that, then I apologize but that is my perception. Just as our personal property rights have been massively diminished in the past 150 years, the right of states to self-determination has been massively diminished as well.
I disagree. Although they ruled against AZ for passing immigration laws that mirrored Fedgov immigration law (which is not a State right no matter how much you twist the Constitution) ,they did uphold that AZ has a State right for LEO's to determine if someone they have detained if they are legally in the country.
I tend to agree with that ruling. I'm an ex-MinuteMan and have been a FAIR supporter since 1987. I was anti-illegal immigration proponent before it was ever a concern.
Plus, you forget that in 2011, the USSC held up Arizona's right to require employers to E-Verify their employees. That was a huge win and why AZ is experiencing less traffic over their border and less illegals looking for jobs.
IMHO, you are wrong about AZ SB1070. It was a win for States' rights. Arizona can now Constitutionally allow their local LEO's to determine if someone is legally in this country. The whole profiling/racist thing was put to bed, for the time being. Of course, there will be persons/groups that bring this stupid profiling thing back up, but it was still a States' Rights win. Yes, Obama has pretty much nullified that with his 800,000 or so free pass to children of illegals and his EO of stopping deporting such? Enjoy a partial win while you can! Have a pizza! Have a beer or two...
26, I say again, 26 of the 57 (har) States sued against Obamacare. Let's work with them to nullify the Roberts Court wrong decision.
I can't believe our entire health-care system and Congressional control was decided by one man. If Roberts had gone the correct way with the dissenters, the entire monstrosity would have been over-turned.
Again, Individual State nullification is now our only way out.
No more replies? Has no one anything to say about this?
The problem is the word 'immigration'.
While the federal gov has the authority to make a uniform rule for immigration, it does not the same as giving them rule over immigration.
The Constitution does give the federal gov authority for a presence at points of entry, yet this jurisdiction is concurrent with the States, not superior to them, AND the sole purpose of this 'border authority' concerns taxation.
There is no Constitutional authority for the federal gov to protect the border, only the authority to respond should a State petition for assistance.
To top it off, unless someone applies FOR citizenship, they are not an 'immigrant', but a denizen, and fall under the jurisdiction of the State.
The power of naturalization, and not that of denization, being delegated to congress, and the power of denization not being prohibited to the states by the constitution, that power ought not to be considered as given to congress, but, on the contrary, as being reserved to the states.
St. George Tucker
That said, I'd like to say a big THANK YOU to you and any other Minutemen who may be lurking. You guys (and gals) have my up-most respect.