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

Skip to comments.

Kansas SOC response to Eric Holder
Kansas Secretary of State ^ | 5/2/2013 | Kris W. Koback

Posted on 05/03/2013 2:11:56 PM PDT by JohnKinAK

Excerpts:

“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. Holder’s 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 Kansas’s authority as a co-equal sovereign under the United States Constitution to regulate a matter that is outside Congress’s 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 Congress’s constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce.”

"With respect to his concern that federal officials be allowed to enforce federal laws, Mr. Holder’s 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 ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: kansas
Kansas tells Holder to stick it, full letter at link
1 posted on 05/03/2013 2:11:57 PM PDT by JohnKinAK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

I like it. No punches pulled, basically called Holder a criminal with no authority to be telling anyone else anything.


2 posted on 05/03/2013 2:12:58 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

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.


3 posted on 05/03/2013 2:18:12 PM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK
With respect to his concern that federal officials be allowed to enforce federal laws, Mr. Holder’s 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.

4 posted on 05/03/2013 2:21:16 PM PDT by Standing Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

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.


5 posted on 05/03/2013 2:21:35 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Wish our governor and atty general would write an identical letter.


6 posted on 05/03/2013 2:22:03 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK


7 posted on 05/03/2013 2:25:32 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

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.


8 posted on 05/03/2013 2:28:27 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

WTF? Who are you talking about?


9 posted on 05/03/2013 2:28:36 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

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


10 posted on 05/03/2013 2:28:37 PM PDT by Tilted Irish Kilt ("Political correctness is tyranny with manners." - Charlton Heston)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost

It was a joke man....


11 posted on 05/03/2013 2:29:19 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost

Oooops, sorry. I read the last word again.. ‘Governor’.. LOL Not happy with Jan Brewer?


12 posted on 05/03/2013 2:30:14 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Awesome response, simply awesome.


13 posted on 05/03/2013 2:31:02 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tilted Irish Kilt

He should’ve mentioned ‘DOMA’ too.. Another Federal Law which 0bama stated specifically he would not enforce.


14 posted on 05/03/2013 2:31:29 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost

50 50. She tends to help Obama more than fight him. But she has done more good than many.


15 posted on 05/03/2013 2:31:33 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Great link
I am betting on Kansas

has any other admin been so hell bent on suing and interferring with states rights?


16 posted on 05/03/2013 2:32:08 PM PDT by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

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.


17 posted on 05/03/2013 2:32:10 PM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Kansas to Holder, “Get Bent.”


18 posted on 05/03/2013 2:32:57 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Yup. Thus many of the current problems.


19 posted on 05/03/2013 2:33:13 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


20 posted on 05/03/2013 2:35:22 PM PDT by Nachum (The Obama "List" at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK
Holder declares SB 102 to be unconstitutional and suggests that federal officials will disregard it.

I was under the impression that another of the divided powers of the Federal Government "decides" what is Constitutional and Un-Constitutional. The Court. Now part of the Executive falsely called the "Department of Justice" thinks it does.

21 posted on 05/03/2013 2:35:33 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

22 posted on 05/03/2013 2:36:20 PM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Pawn’d and Bitch Slapped


23 posted on 05/03/2013 2:50:54 PM 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: JohnKinAK

Go Kobach!


24 posted on 05/03/2013 2:54:40 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

SOC? Secretary of Candy?


25 posted on 05/03/2013 2:55:12 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (I am a dissident. Will you join me? My name is John....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

yeah Holder you are wrong only the S Ct can declare the law unconstitutional and it has to go up the chain properly so stfu


26 posted on 05/03/2013 2:56:17 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
Not happy with Jan Brewer?

Not particularly, no. Just vetoed a bill to allow use of Silver and Gold as currency in the state of AZ. She is not, and never was, a conservative.

27 posted on 05/03/2013 2:57:49 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (I am a dissident. Will you join me? My name is John....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK
The only problem with the author's argument is that Supreme Court precedent is against him. In a New Deal era decision called Wickard v. Filburn, the Supreme Court ruled that wheat that was grown by a farmer for his own family's use could be regulated by the Congress under the Interstate Commerce Clause. The wheat was never sold, and so it never entered into interstate commerce. But the reasoning was that because the farmer grew the wheat for his own consumption, he did not need to buy wheat from someone else - and THAT affected interstate commerce.

So I can easily see how the courts could rule that guns made in Kansas, sold in Kansas and kept in Kansas could affect Interstate Commerce because Kansans would not need to buy from gun makers in other states - and find that those guns are subject to regulation on that basis.

28 posted on 05/03/2013 3:04:48 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
FWIW, the Framers considered and rejected expansive commerce powers in direct opposition to Wickard v. Filburn, here.
29 posted on 05/03/2013 3:05:57 PM PDT by Jacquerie (How few were left who had seen the republic! - Tacitus, The Annals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK
This is causing quite a stir - making the gun control freaks heads explode.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F1nPSNnaBo

only 2 minutes - pass it on after viewing. it is going viral ...

30 posted on 05/03/2013 3:06:51 PM PDT by bankwalker (In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost

That is some letter! I look forward to our AG Abbott taking a similar tack with “Holder” (Ha - no “Mr., no Atty. Gen., just Holder).


31 posted on 05/03/2013 3:14:47 PM PDT by Paine in the Neck (Socialism consumes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Next thing ya know, eric the red holder will be trying to pull a sting on the State of Knasas, for defying his commie powers.


32 posted on 05/03/2013 3:20:56 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Being deceived can be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

SCOTUS has been wrong so many times before.

Precedence can KMA. The abuse of the Interstate Commerce clause is a blatant power grab and it will some day result in the dissolution of the Union.


33 posted on 05/03/2013 3:25:04 PM PDT by EricT. (Another Muslim terrorist. Who saw that coming?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

I don’t see Illinois governor Quinn doing something like this. In fact, it would not surprise me to see him invite Holder and federal posse to harass gun owners..


34 posted on 05/03/2013 3:25:17 PM PDT by cardinal4 (Constitution? What Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK
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.

Silly man.

Only the King can decide what will survive Constitutional challenge, and what is legal or not.

And don't presume to know that what was legal and constitutional then is legal and constitutional now.

"That was a long time ago" is the new legal yardstick to measure relevancy. People said that Obama's words came with an expiration date. Now it is codified by his spokesperson.

-PJ

35 posted on 05/03/2013 3:32:26 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

Whatever.

You have to try, try and try again — not give up and knuckle under to the tyranny because you “suppose” you can’t win!

God Bless Kansas!


36 posted on 05/03/2013 3:36:44 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Without GOD, men get what they deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK; Jacquerie; All

WOOOHOOOO! HOORAY Kris W. Koback! Thanks for the link to that very good thread (revisited), Jacquerie.

Constitutional BUMP! Federalists/anti-federalists BUMP! FReedom-sovereignty/slavery BUMP!


37 posted on 05/03/2013 3:43:16 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK; All

“The Obama Administration has repeatedly violated the United States Constitution the past four-and-a-half years. That abuse cannot continue.”


38 posted on 05/03/2013 4:00:10 PM PDT by Hotlanta Mike ("Governing a great natiorn is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK
This thread made my day...

I used to be amazed at the hubris and unmitigated arrogance emulating from this White House...not any more...it's a daily occurance

They do actually believe they are above the law...

Great to see someone tell them to go pound and and be in their face about it..

39 posted on 05/03/2013 4:10:44 PM PDT by Popman (Godlessness is always the first step to the concentration camp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

BRAVO!!


40 posted on 05/03/2013 4:11:32 PM PDT by Thom Pain (U.S. Constitution is a CONTRACT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

Easy fix (though the ‘10’s-20’s SC decisions are for shit anyway)....Constitutional carry. No license, no permission, tell Fedzilla to F off


41 posted on 05/03/2013 4:14:54 PM PDT by i_robot73 (We hold that all individuals have the Right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives - LP.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

That SCOTUS decision was unconstitutional.


42 posted on 05/03/2013 4:16:15 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Fzob

bump


43 posted on 05/03/2013 4:32:41 PM PDT by Popman (Godlessness is always the first step to the concentration camp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Is there a non-Scribd source for that letter? To have to have anything to do with the repulsive Facebook just to get a document is a revolting prospect.


44 posted on 05/03/2013 4:53:59 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

The Governor should send an engraved invitation to Holder inviting him to come to Kansas personally and attempt to violate their new law. If he’s so sure it’s un-Constitutional he won’t mind being the test case personally.


45 posted on 05/03/2013 4:57:55 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

The ATF is nothing more than a bunch of overweight pig state terrorists created to murder women, children and babies. The Nazi pig Holder runs that operation. Let’s not forget that George H W Bush defended these cowardly murderers.


46 posted on 05/03/2013 5:03:15 PM PDT by sergeantdave (No, I don't have links for everything I post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

Gee, and our Florida AG is busy trying to lynch a man in my county for defending himself against a black thug...because her attorney friend is representing the punks family.

Would like to trade Kansas for their AG.....I will throw in a RINO Amnesty Liberal Senator, too. My AG is kinda pretty too


47 posted on 05/03/2013 5:10:45 PM PDT by SeminoleCounty (GOP - Greenlighting Obama's Programs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnKinAK

BTTT


48 posted on 05/03/2013 5:33:15 PM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Bump


49 posted on 05/03/2013 6:04:20 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
The answer to Wickard v. Filburn is principled defiance and a philosophical reconsideration of the limits of stare decisis.
50 posted on 05/04/2013 9:09:22 AM PDT by Mmmike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

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