Skip to comments.Kansas SOC response to Eric Holder
Posted on 05/03/2013 2:11:56 PM PDT by JohnKinAK
On April 26, 2013, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder sent a letter to Kansas Governor Brownback concerning SB 102, the Second Amendment Protection Act. In that letter, Holder declares SB 102 to be unconstitutional and suggests that federal officials will disregard it. Holders understanding of the United States Constitution is incorrect.
As one of the co-authors of SB 102 and a former professor of constitutional law, I ensured that it was drafted to withstand any legal challenge. SB 102 states that a firearm that is assembled in Kansas, that is stamped Made in Kansas, and that never leaves the State of Kansas is not subject to regulation by the federal government. It was drafted with the intent to assert Kansass authority as a co-equal sovereign under the United States Constitution to regulate a matter that is outside Congresss jurisdiction under the Interstate Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8. It was also drafted to stave off unconstitutional legislation pending in Congress that not only infringes upon the Second Amendment rights of Kansas Citizens, but also exceeds Congresss constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce.
"With respect to his concern that federal officials be allowed to enforce federal laws, Mr. Holders statement is a curious one. He was evidently not concerned that ATFE officials be allowed to enforce federal law when his agency oversaw the fast and furious operation to walk guns into the hands of Mexican cartels.
The State of Kansas is determined to restore the Constitution and to protect the right of its citizens to keep and bear arms."
(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...
I like it. No punches pulled, basically called Holder a criminal with no authority to be telling anyone else anything.
the states, it seems to my, could use this model to interpose their authority between the people and the feds very effectively in a wide rage of activities.
With respect to his concern that federal officials be allowed to enforce federal laws, Mr. Holders statement is a curious one. He was evidently not concerned that ATFE officials be allowed to enforce federal law when his agency oversaw the fast and furious operation to walk guns into the hands of Mexican cartels.
Well, yeah, but I'm sure those cartels contributed millions of dollars to President You Didn't Build That's reelection campaign, so it was okay.
Hopefully Sheriff Arpaio will go to Kansas, arrest this man, bring him to AZ and have him sentenced to a minimum of 4 years as Governor.
Wish our governor and atty general would write an identical letter.
Like use of federal lands for starters.
States need to ‘repatriate’ control over so called ‘federal land’. Ask Nevada about that one. AZ to but to a lesser extent.
WTF? Who are you talking about?
Selective enforcement of which Federal laws you will support
is a violation of your sworn oath to support the Constitution .
It is sorta like : being ‘a little-bit pregnant’
You either are , .. or are not
It was a joke man....
Oooops, sorry. I read the last word again.. ‘Governor’.. LOL Not happy with Jan Brewer?
Awesome response, simply awesome.
He should’ve mentioned ‘DOMA’ too.. Another Federal Law which 0bama stated specifically he would not enforce.
50 50. She tends to help Obama more than fight him. But she has done more good than many.
I am betting on Kansas
has any other admin been so hell bent on suing and interferring with states rights?
Since the New Deal the states have agreed to act more or less like bureaus of the central government rather than individual and separately constituted political entities.
Kansas to Holder, “Get Bent.”
Yup. Thus many of the current problems.
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list