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

Skip to comments.

Eric Holder to Kansas governor: New state gun law unconstitutional
washingtontimes.com ^ | 5/2/13 | David Sherfinski

Posted on 05/02/2013 10:35:34 AM PDT by ColdOne

A new law in Kansas that criminalizes the enforcement of federal gun controls in the state is unconstitutional, Attorney General Eric H. Holder said.

“In purporting to override federal law and to criminalize the official acts of federal officers, [the law] directly conflicts with federal law and is therefore unconstitutional,” Mr. Holder wrote to Gov. Sam Brownback in a letter dated April 26. “Federal officers who are responsible for enforcing federal laws and regulations in order to maintain public safety cannot be forced to choose between the risk of a criminal prosecution by a state and the continued performance of their federal duties.”

Mr. Holder cites the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says federal law trumps conflicting state authority or exercise of power. Kansas’s law became effective April 25.

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Kansas
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; backofferic; banglist; bloodoftyrants; comeandtakeit; democrats; doj; dojisajoke; donttreadonme; fueh; govtabuse; guncontrol; holder; liberalfascism; libertyordeath; molonlabe; mrfastandfurious; nocompromise; obama; resist; saysthegunrunner; secondamendment; shallnotbeinfringed; statesrights; tyranny; waronliberty; wewillnotcomply; youwillnotdisarmus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-157 next last

1 posted on 05/02/2013 10:35:34 AM PDT by ColdOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Good luck Mr. Ruby Wac0.


2 posted on 05/02/2013 10:36:35 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
Mr. Holder cites the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says federal law trumps conflicting state authority or exercise of power.

I guess he quit reading the Bill of Rights at the end of the First Amendment. He missed amendments 2 and 10.

3 posted on 05/02/2013 10:38:21 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Holder, in this, also justifies the Fugitive Slave Act and says states had no authority to employ nullification against it.

The irony is delicious.


4 posted on 05/02/2013 10:38:22 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

FU Faggot.

10th Amendment ...

You do not have authority.


5 posted on 05/02/2013 10:39:14 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
“Federal officers who are responsible for enforcing federal laws and regulations in order to maintain public safety cannot be forced to choose between the risk of a criminal prosecution by a state and the continued performance of their federal duties.”

Simple answer: Stay the F out of our state!

6 posted on 05/02/2013 10:39:55 AM PDT by Feckless (I was trained by the US << This Tagline Censored by FR >> ain't that irOnic?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
directly conflicts with federal law and is therefore unconstitutional,

Yeah, but federal gun control law would be unconstitutional, so UP YOURS, Mr Fast and Furious.

7 posted on 05/02/2013 10:40:04 AM PDT by SIDENET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Take it up with the guys in robes, Mr. Fast & Furious. BTT.


8 posted on 05/02/2013 10:40:26 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
Try enforcing the border "federal law" first...than we'll talk....

FUEH

9 posted on 05/02/2013 10:40:46 AM PDT by RckyRaCoCo (Shall Not Be Infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Like Holder gives a shit about the Constitution.


10 posted on 05/02/2013 10:41:08 AM PDT by Altura Ct.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

“Mr. Holder cites the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says federal law trumps conflicting state authority or exercise of power. Kansas’s law became effective April 25.”

Sorry Holder, the supremency clause applies only to constitutional laws that are within the powers granted to the federal government, not your unconstitutional nonsense.


11 posted on 05/02/2013 10:41:15 AM PDT by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Supremacy Clause????

GFY.

Show us where you have authority.


12 posted on 05/02/2013 10:41:28 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Doesn’t it just burn . . . when our enemies, when race baiting demagogues invoke the Constitution they despise and work to destroy?


13 posted on 05/02/2013 10:41:47 AM PDT by Jacquerie (How few were left who had seen the republic! - Tacitus, The Annals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Since when has Holder ever been concerned with the Constitution, and isn’t up to the Supreme Court to ultimately determine if a law is Constitutional? If Holder ever start enforcing all our current laws as required under the Constitution I’ll start to pay attention to him, but that day will never happen with this racist.


14 posted on 05/02/2013 10:41:59 AM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Go ahead, Holder, and make Kansas’ day. I am waiting for Obama’s army to just try, just TRY, to take on a Red State.


15 posted on 05/02/2013 10:42:50 AM PDT by Arkansas Toothpick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

The fact that it’s even gotten this far means people are quickly losing their fear of the Obunga/Holder/Incompetano team.


16 posted on 05/02/2013 10:42:50 AM PDT by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Ahem, Mr. Holder, as a Kansan, you aren’t taking our state over for the Nanny State that you and Obama envision!


17 posted on 05/02/2013 10:43:11 AM PDT by zerosix (Native Sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
the state law is unconstitutional, Attorney General Eric H. Holder said

Last I heard the supremes were the ones to determine the unconstitutionality or not of laws, not some borderline incompetent affirmative action hack from the executive branch.

18 posted on 05/02/2013 10:43:29 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

The Constitution in the 2nd Amendment states:

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

That is a restriction on the US Federal government to not infringe on the right to bear arms. How can it be more clear?


19 posted on 05/02/2013 10:43:58 AM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
Holder, in this, also justifies the Fugitive Slave Act and says states had no authority to employ nullification against it.

According to the Supreme Court, no they didn't. But I think the 13th Amendment took out the need for those.

20 posted on 05/02/2013 10:46:20 AM PDT by 0.E.O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

“Doesn’t it just burn . . . when our enemies, when race baiting demagogues invoke the Constitution they despise and work to destroy?”

Alinsky


21 posted on 05/02/2013 10:46:32 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (The reason we own guns is to protect ourselves from those wanting to take our guns from us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Holder’s probably right, but it isn’t his place to declare what is Constitutional and what is not. Until Kansas actually tries to enforce the law it won’t make it to court for a final determination.


22 posted on 05/02/2013 10:47:54 AM PDT by 0.E.O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Holder’s burning alive of American
children was not Constitutional.

Holder’s holding back of US law enforcement
by COLOR was not Constitutional.

Holder’s arming of narcoterrorists
and Islamic terrorists is not Constitutional.


23 posted on 05/02/2013 10:48:25 AM PDT by Diogenesis (De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkansas Toothpick

I am waiting for Obama's army to just try, just TRY, to take on a Red State.

I'm not anxious to see CW-II started, but I'll do my part to bring it to a swift end. Kansas is as good a place as any to stand ground.


24 posted on 05/02/2013 10:48:37 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
Last I heard the supremes were the ones to determine the unconstitutionality or not of laws, not some borderline incompetent affirmative action hack from the executive branch, talking more about his bosses executive orders and departmental policies than actual laws.

HF

25 posted on 05/02/2013 10:49:26 AM PDT by holden (Alter or abolish it yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Holder can take the Supremacy Clause and shove it up his Obama.
Only valid federal laws enacted pursuant to enumerated powers under the Constitution, with the Tenth Amendment as a backdrop, are supreme.
The left has been claiming supremacy for the Feds to do whatever they want to whoever they want under their misguided interpretation of the Constitution.
I’m a lawyer and I know full well how this plays out. That said, states need to STOP trying to fight the federal government by playing by their rules on their turf. Just tell them to STFU and hold your ground.
Don’t try to litigate in a federal court expecting a fair shake.
That is one of the many reasons the 17th Amendment was such a horrible idea.
Imagine all federal judges having to be confirmed by a body (senate) comprised of essentially embassadors from each state to represent the states best interest. The all powerful commerce clause (presently in question) would not be what it is today, and the Tenth Amendment would carry a lot if weight.
The 17th Amendment took a brilliant concept by the founders and twisted it beyond repair.
Now in the legislative brach we simply have the same pigs kept in two separate pens.
It should be one body to quickly act on behalf of the people, knowing that reelection is just around the corner.
Then a completely separate body that is there to slowly deliberate and advocate for the interest of their state.
That’s what would have stopped all the nonsense since the 17th A was adopted.


26 posted on 05/02/2013 10:49:48 AM PDT by Clump ( the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
“Federal officers who are responsible for enforcing federal laws and regulations in order to maintain public safety cannot be forced to choose between the risk of a criminal prosecution by a state and the continued performance of their federal duties.”

Yeah? Wait and see.

27 posted on 05/02/2013 10:52:55 AM PDT by Oberon (Big Brutha Be Watchin'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Kansas needs to tell Holder he does not have standing...


28 posted on 05/02/2013 10:53:01 AM PDT by El Laton Caliente (NRA Life Member & www.Gunsnet.net Moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Obama couldn’t care less about the constitution. It has become Might Is Right.


29 posted on 05/02/2013 10:54:06 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clump

I agree.

Very well stated.


30 posted on 05/02/2013 10:56:06 AM PDT by Zeneta (No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: so_real

I’m not anxious to see CW-II started, but I’ll do my part to bring it to a swift end. Kansas is as good a place as any to stand ground.


I was against the first Iraq war being started, but as soon as it did start, I was participating in the “support our troops” marches with the attitude of, “now we are there. Let’s win this thing with all speed and get our guys home.”

i.e. I am in agreement with you on this.


31 posted on 05/02/2013 10:57:13 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Moulon Labe.

Hold firm, Kansas. The whole danged state.


32 posted on 05/02/2013 10:58:04 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (All observant Muslims want to kill you. If they don't, they are not really Muslims.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Well, no. Federal Laws infringing on the right to keep and bear arms are unconstitutional, and may appropriately be ignored by the states, and resisted as needed.


33 posted on 05/02/2013 11:01:59 AM PDT by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Altura Ct.

Like Holder gives a shit about the Constitution.

sure he does , it’s printed on his toilet paper and uses it every day


34 posted on 05/02/2013 11:02:17 AM PDT by molson209
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

The tree of liberty is looking mighty parched.


35 posted on 05/02/2013 11:02:57 AM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Bloody Kansas II ?


36 posted on 05/02/2013 11:04:43 AM PDT by Inwoodian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: so_real
I'm not anxious to see CW-II started, but I'll do my part to bring it to a swift end. Kansas is as good a place as any to stand ground.

Count me in. We all owe a debt to those who left bloody footprints on the frozen ground at Valley Forge. It's past time to pay that debt.

37 posted on 05/02/2013 11:04:53 AM PDT by OSHA (One despises and wants to destroy the United States, the other is a dead terrorist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
We as conservatives need to start arguing for policies as if there were no Constitution. Because, in reality, there is not one.

When debating with liberals you don't want to bring up the constitution because it will only be used as a weapon against those who respect it by those who don't. They will be more than happy to use it to score political points and then abandon it when it is no longer useful.

They will twist the 4th amendment or the 1st amendment or the 14th amendment to mean some new thing that it didn't mean at the time it was written. Then when a conservative points out exactly what it says in the 2nd amendment, the liberal will say, "Well, the constitution is outdated and doesn't really apply any more."

In any debate, you need to first agree on the principals and then argue why the principals endorse your position and refute your opponents position.

It used to be we all agreed that the constitution, the way it was written, was supreme and sovereign. It was entirely appropriate to use it in an argument. That is no longer the case. We now have to back up a few steps in our argument and use other principals which are agreed upon. (if there are any)

38 posted on 05/02/2013 11:05:35 AM PDT by nitzy (You can avoid reality but you can't avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Oh I see.... NOW you are worried about the Constitution.


39 posted on 05/02/2013 11:06:21 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

New York law now prohibits me from loading more than 7 rounds of ammo in a magazine for my semi-auto pistols. Federal law has no such limitation. Since the two laws conflict, does that mean that I can ignore New York law?


40 posted on 05/02/2013 11:08:07 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OSHA

This is just like the story of China marching in and claiming land in India. That is exactly what Obama and the progressives do- and I can’t see where anyone challenges them.

Every time they make a move- we need someone to stand up and push back somehow. Bloodshed might not be necessary- why are people not taking Obama’s administration to court?

We need to call their bluff, is what I think.

When Obama changes Homeschooling, I am ready to go in. How about others?

Ready to make a stand in your circle of influence?


41 posted on 05/02/2013 11:09:55 AM PDT by Truth2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Someone remind the esteemed Mr. Holder of the Commonwealth of Massachussetts and State of Ohio’s Personal Liberty Laws which criminalized compliance with the federal Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.


42 posted on 05/02/2013 11:11:24 AM PDT by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

To Eric Holder. We don’t much care what you think. We are not going to surrender our guns, we pity the fool that tries to make us.


43 posted on 05/02/2013 11:15:49 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Feckless

““Federal officers who are responsible for enforcing federal laws and regulations in order to maintain public safety cannot be forced to choose between the risk of a criminal prosecution by a state and the continued performance of their federal duties.”
Simple answer: Stay the F out of our state!”

That is exactly right. Go do “your job” elsewhere.


44 posted on 05/02/2013 11:18:13 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne
Go back and re-read the 10th Amendment, Doofis !
45 posted on 05/02/2013 11:20:45 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (NRA Life Member)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdOne

Hey holder you putz does that apply to our border agents who are being told what laws to enforce and which ones not to,when they swear an oath to enforce all laws?


46 posted on 05/02/2013 11:22:52 AM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


47 posted on 05/02/2013 11:22:54 AM PDT by RedMDer (May we always be happy and may our enemies always know it. - Sarah Palin, 10-18-2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Vendome
In a SANE United States, the SCOTUS would rule that ANY INFRINGEMENT ON A CITIZEN'S 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS is Unconstitutional. Therefore, Eric Holder, YOU have no authority to VIOLATE INALIENABLE RIGHTS.

Our Forefathers didn't make the 2nd Amendment CONDITIONAL AS OUR GOV'T IS DOING NOW. If anyone with depression be deemed banned from owning a firearm, THEN THE FEDS WOULD SIMPLY DEEM EVERYONE DEPRESSED. It's INALIENABLE, meaning 'CANNOT BE TAKEN AWAY'.

48 posted on 05/02/2013 11:24:43 AM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


To: FReepers; Patriots; FRiends
Yesterday, Eric threatened Kansas over its new law to nullify federal gun control measures.
We felt it required a response that could be summed up in 5 words or less.

Someone had to say it:






Please Support Free Republic Today.

344 posted on 05/02/2013 9:54:53 AM PDT by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)

49 posted on 05/02/2013 11:26:04 AM PDT by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clump

I agree the 17th needs to go.


50 posted on 05/02/2013 11:26:41 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-157 next last

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