Missouri Bill Would Ban Support for Federal Gun Control “Past, Present, or Future”

From the Tenth Amendment Center, January 2, 2018 •

JEFFERSON CITY. Mo. (Jan. 2, 2018) – A bill introduced in the Missouri House would ban the state from enforcement of all federal gun control. Passage into law would represent a major step towards ending federal acts that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms within the state in practice and effect.

Rep. Jeff Pogue (R-Salem) prefiled House Bill 1760 (HB1760) on Dec. 27. Titled the “Second Amendment Preservation Act,” the legislation would ban any person, including any “public officer or employee of state state and its political subdivisions, from enforcing any past, present or future federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, regulations, statutes, or ordinances that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.”

HB1760 includes a detailed definition of actions that qualify as infringement, including taxes and fees that would have a chilling effect on firearms ownership, registration and tracking schemes that would have a chilling effect, gun bans and gun confiscation.

The legislation includes a provision that would allow anybody who violates the law and knowingly deprives somebody of their right to keep and bear arms as defined by the law to be sued for damages in civil court.

“Sovereign, official, or qualified immunity shall not be an affirmative defense in such actions.”

HB1760 also includes provisions that would apply to federal agents who knowingly enforce or attempt to enforce any of the infringing acts identified in the law, or who give material aid and support to such enforcement efforts. Under the proposed law, they would “be permanently ineligible to serve as a law enforcement officer or to supervise law enforcement officers for the state or any political subdivision of the state.” This would also apply to state or local law enforcement agents working with federal task forces or deputized by federal agencies. In other words, Missouri law enforcement officers who cooperate with the feds in a violation of a person’s right to keep and bear arms would lose their jobs and never be able to work in Missouri law enforcement again.

EFFECTIVE

The federal government relies heavily on state cooperation to implement and enforce almost all of its laws, regulations and acts – including gun control. By simply withdrawing this necessary cooperation, states can nullify in effect many federal actions. As noted by the National Governor’s Association during the partial government shutdown of 2013, “states are partners with the federal government on most federal programs.”

Based on James Madison’s advice for states and individuals in Federalist #46, a “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” represents an extremely effective method to bring down federal gun control measures because most enforcement actions rely on help, support and leadership from the states.

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano agreed. In a televised discussion on the issue, he noted that a single state taking this step would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible” to enforce.

“Partnerships don’t work too well when half the team quits,” said Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. “By withdrawing all resources and participation in federal gun control, states can help bring these unconstitutional act to their much-needed end.”

NECESSARY

Some gun rights supporters argue that such a measure is “unnecessary” because it addresses a nonexistent problem with a Republican Congress and an NRA-backed president.

“While we’re not expecting any new gun control to come from the federal government in the next few years, there’s still a lot of unconstitutional federal gun control measures on the books today,” Boldin said. “Whether it’s the National Firearms Act of 1934 or the Gun Control Act of 1968, plus many others – the states can build a sanctuary for the right to keep and bear arms against the unconstitutional ATF.”

LEGAL BASIS

HB859 rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce any federal act or program. The anti-commandeering doctrine is based primarily on four Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. US serves as the cornerstone.

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

WHAT’S NEXT

HB1760 will first need to be assigned to a committee after it is formally introduced in January. Once it receives an assignment, it will need to pass by a majority vote before moving forward in the legislative process.

You can support the Tenth Amendment Center HERE.

# # #

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Founders, Learn Liberty, Nullification, The Constitution, Tyranny | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

K-12: Killing Democracy

By Bruce Deitrick Price at American Thinker, January 3, 2018 •

Rudolf Flesch, in his 1955 book, noted that “things have changed in the last 10, 20 years.  For the first time in history, American parents see their children getting less education than they got themselves.  Their sons and daughters come home from school and they can’t read the newspaper; they can’t spell simple words like February or Wednesday; they don’t know the difference between Austria and Australia.  The fathers and mothers don’t know the reason for this, but they know that something terrible has happened to their most precious dreams and aspirations[.]”

Isn’t it beautiful – the way Flesch perceives the decline of American civilization from two tiny examples?  Austria and Australia look alike.  What’s the big deal about telling them apart?  Such casual imprecision is how students think today and is the essence of our problem.  Flesch remains The Man in American education.  Early on, he grasped the garish symptoms of the country’s intellectual death spiral.  A school system that doesn’t teach children the difference between days of the week and months of the year?  Well, there’s little hope for it.

Even as the Education Establishment insisted that American children read, write, and spell better than ever, Flesch proved the absurdity of this claim.  He saw the country’s academic decline; he saw the intellectual fabric of the country start to unravel.  “The American dream is, essentially, equal opportunity through free education for all.  This dream is beginning to vanish in a country where the public schools are falling down on the job[.]”

Please read that three times.  There should be symphonic accompaniment with big drums.  The American dream is vanishing; equal opportunity through free education is fading.  All of this was stated back in 1955, in Flesch’s famous book, Why Johnny Can’t Read.  Writing ostensibly on competing theories about reading, Flesch exposes competing theories of who shall control the country.  Flesch is talking about power.  With sight-words, people don’t have any.

You do not need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.  If hostile forces want to subvert the country, the simplest technique is to subvert reading.  Australia-Austria become part of the same blur.  Words and language, reading and comprehension – these touch every aspect of every life every day.  Poison reading, and you poison everything else.  (And the victims are made to pay for it all, in ever higher education budgets!)

Rudolf Flesch, who had both a law degree and a Ph.D. in library science, was the sharpest knife in the drawer.  He saw this attempted coup directed against reading.  He saw that the use of sight-words (also known as the whole word method) was nothing less than an attempt to destroy reading as traditionally understood and replace it with a crippled sort of faux reading.  He saw the grand significance of this coup: “I say, therefore, that the word method is gradually destroying democracy in this country; it returns to the upper[] middle[] class the privileges that public education was supposed to distribute evenly among the people.”  Everyone who has a good patriotic heart should feel sick reading that.

The Founding Fathers saw public education as the means for fulfilling the country’s big dreams.  Public education was supposed to give everyone an even shot.  Without fair, efficient education, however, the benefits could not be distributed.  Those in the upper middle class could hold on to their privileges and expand them.  People cynically calling themselves liberals and Democrats would assist this illiberal, anti-democratic operation.

Flesch’s chronology starts in the middle 1930s, a few years after sight-words were made the dominant instructional method.  He notes sarcastically that the educators “trot out all sorts of data and statistics to show that American children read, write, spell much better than they used to.”  In fact, there were many illiteracy problems, including dyslexia.

The Education Establishment knew that sight-words are not an actual way to read or to teach reading.  What, then?  Sight-words were more like a psy-ops directed at the enemy’s weakest point.  This salient, wide and powerful, exists to this day.  The majority of children in the United States learn to read with sight-words.  Nothing has changed since the 1930s.  This is a remarkable victory for the dark side.

As a practical matter, the victims of sight-words are given a severely limited vocabulary.  You might think of it as a worker’s or slave’s vocabulary.  Instead of the 100,000 or 200,000 words that most educated people speak and read without much effort, you have people who are painfully confined to a reading vocabulary of only 500 or 1,000 sight-words.  These people are called functional illiterates, and they are not a tiny minority.  This is 50 million people.  Illiteracy and sight-words go together like love and marriage.

Flesch is such a keen observer and thinker that he seems to be a prophet.  In fact, anyone could see who wanted to.  The Education Establishment was committed to dumbing down the country.  Its operatives went with the method that would do that.  Anyone seriously interested in turning the situation around has to go back to the beginning, circa 1935, when things started to fall apart.  Eliminate the big change at that time: the introduction of sight-words.  Return to the traditional teaching of reading by phonics.  Presto.  We are reborn.

Why Johnny Can’t Read can be purchased on Amazon for under $10.  Every educated person should read Chapter 1, about 22 pages.  Indeed, you understand our educational problems only when you have read this.  Flesch wrote a second book in 1981 called Why Johnny Still Can’t Read.  If you have time to read an entire book, this is the best choice.  It’s built around the ten alibis, and they haven’t changed in forty years.  The main one is “We do teach phonics.”

As that claim shows, K-12 is a swamp of sophistry and insincerity.  There’s not much you can trust.  Flesch and phonics – trust them.

Bruce Deitrick Price’s new book is Saving K-12.  He deconstructs educational theories and methods at Improve-Education.org.

# # #

Posted in Bill of Rights, Education, Founders, Global Governance, The Constitution, Tyranny | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The State Government Agency That Spied on Citizens

By Hans von Spakovsky at The Daily Signal, Deember 18, 2017 •

A new report on a government spying operation conducted by partisan bureaucrats should outrage and scare Americans everywhere. It shows what can happen when, as the report says, partisans “weaponize” a government agency and use its powers to advance “political goals.”

Americans already have seen that when federal bureaucrats such as Lois Lerner or Samantha Power do that with the fearsome power of the IRS and our intelligence agencies, we face a threat to our liberty and the democratic process that is unparalleled in our history.

The 88-page report by Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel details the notorious “John Doe” investigations that went after almost every conservative, nonprofit organization in Wisconsin (the state chapter of Club for Growth among them) for supposed violations of campaign finance laws.

Except that there were not any actual violations of the law, according to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The court shut down the prosecutions in 2015, calling the legal theory under which the prosecutors were pursuing the case “unsupported in either reason or law.”

The state’s highest court used the word “amazing” in describing the “breadth” of documents seized by prosecutors through numerous, wide-ranging subpoenas and search warrants. This included “virtually every document possessed by the [targets] relating to every aspect of their lives, both personal and professional, over a five-year span.”

The report from Schimel, a Republican, has an unbelievable list of 218 subpoenas and search warrants issued in the investigation—and this is only a “partial” list.

Prosecutors treated conservative organizations as if they were dangerous drug cartels or mob operations. As the Wisconsin Supreme Court said, they executed search warrants against the personal homes and families of the leaders of these nonprofits in “pre-dawn, armed, paramilitary-style raids in which bright floodlights were used to illuminate the targets’ homes.”

Here is the meritless theory behind the investigations: Any support for issues important to Gov. Scott Walker, such as the bill reducing union power over state government employees, was illegal “coordination.”

As the state Supreme Court said, however, our democracy is supposed to assure the “unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people.” Instead, the prosecutors’ theories “would assure that such political speech will be investigated with paramilitary-style home invasions conducted in the pre-dawn hours and then prosecuted and punished.”

[READ MORE HERE]

# # #

 

 

Posted in 4th Amendment, Bill of Rights, Learn Liberty, News, The Constitution, Tyranny | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Walter E. Williams: The Power Lied With the States

“All the states should recognize that the power lies with the states. The states created the federal government. The federal government did not create the states.”

                                                        — Walter E. Williams​

 

From our friends at Tenth Amendment Center:

# # #

Posted in 10th Amendment, Bill of Rights, News, Nullification | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Proposed Washington Law Shows Gun-Grabbers Intend to Have It Both Ways

Mixed signals and conflicting directions overwhelm and discourage citizens from going where they need to. That’s the point.

By David Codrea at Oath Keepers, December 21, 2017 •

“November’s special election will give Democrats control of both the state House and Senate for the first time since 2012 during the next legislative session,” Seattle’s My Northwest reported Tuesday. “November’s special election will give Democrats control of both the state House and Senate for the first time since 2012 during the next legislative session.”

That means they’ll renew their crusade for citizen disarmament.

Case in point, a “Restoration of Local Authority” bill being sponsored in the next legislative session by Democrat State Representative Nicole Macri will end 30 years of statewide preemption of firearms law, creating a patchwork quilt of changing edicts that will be difficult, if not impossible, for gun owners to navigate.  That’s the intent.

Think of the compliance confusion exemplified in the Shaneen Allen case, when a Pennsylvania woman with a concealed carry permit entered New Jersey with her gun – and almost had her life destroyed in the process. Now imagine similar situations arising from crossing invisible municipal lines.

And how presumptuous to claim authority they never legitimately had is being restored.

For all her high-sounding justifications arguing for the new bill, you’ll note Macri is not offering local autonomy for another bill she’s sponsoring, House Bill 1134, “AN ACT Relating to assault weapons and large capacity magazines” (English translation: Banning them).

Sorry, your town doesn’t get to opt out.

That’s typical hypocrisy. Barack Obama helped lay the groundwork for it when he was faking looking reasonable and claimed “I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne.”

What exactly works in Chicago was left unsaid. What Obama was doing was making the fraudulent case that states and local jurisdictions have the power to negate unalienable rights based on the tyranny of a regional majority.

Note that only goes one way, though. Whenever the gun-grabbers want to impose their will on others by restricting rights, the infringements cover everyone, in Everytown, regardless of whether they’re in Chicago or Cheyenne.

Or Seattle or Stevens County

Conversely, when widespread restrictions on rights are eased a bit, all of a sudden indignant “progressives” start screaming about “home rule.” No matter that a higher level of government has enacted protective legislation; all of a sudden it’s imperative for control freak enclaves to claim the power to ban guns in parks, to outlaw classifications of firearms they don’t want to let people own, and to forbid the practice of carrying, or transporting or transferring. They insist on having it both ways which means they insist on always having it their way.

When they say “home rule,” they mean to rule your home.

#

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.

David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”

# # #

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Bill of Rights, Learn Liberty, The Constitution | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

This Week in History: Virginia Passes James Madison’s Resolutions of 1798

By Mike Maharrey at Tenth Amendment Center, December 24, 2017 •

On Christmas Eve, 1798, the Virginia Senate gave final approval to a proposal from James Madison, which we know today as the Virginia Resolutions of 1798.

By December of that year, the United States was in a full-blown constitutional crisis, and James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were stealthily leading the fight to push the federal government back within its prescribed limits.

During the summer of that year, Congress passed four acts together known as the Alien and Sedition Acts. President Adams signed each of these acts into law. With winds of war blowing across the Atlantic, the Federalist Party majority wrote these laws to prevent “seditious” acts from weakening the U.S. government. Federalists utilized fear of the French to stir up support for these draconian laws, expanding federal power, concentrating authority in the executive branch and severely restricting freedom of speech.

Two of the Alien Acts gave the president the power to declare any foreign U.S. residents enemies, lock them up and deport them. These acts vested judicial authority in the executive branch and obliterated due process. The Sedition Act essentially outlawed criticizing the federal government – a clear violation of the First Amendment.

Throughout the fall of 1798, the federal government prosecuted several prominent newspaper publishers for violations of the Sedition Act. They literally arrested and jailed people for opposing the government.The feds even prosecuted and jailed Matthew Lyon, a sitting U.S. congressman from Vermont.

In November, the Kentucky legislature passed the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, secretly penned by Jefferson. The resolutions declared the Alien and Sedition Acts unconstitutional, and therefore “void and of no force.” In the original draft of the resolutions, Jefferson declared, “Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.”

The Kentucky Resolutions were the first salvo in a two-pronged attack planned by Madison and Jefferson. A week after the resolutions passed in Kentucky, Jefferson sent Madison a copy, along with a letter urging him to press forward.

I inclose you a copy of the draught of the Kentuckey resolves. I think we should distinctly affirm all the important principles they contain, so as to hold to that ground in future, and leave the matter in such a train as that we may not be committed absolutely to push the matter to extremities, & yet may be free to push as far as events will render prudent. 

Madison did just that, drafting his own resolutions for introduction in the Virginia legislature. The Virginia Resolutions declared the Alien and Sedition Acts “unconstitutional.” Madison also asserted that the states had an obligation to act against egregious federal exercises of undelegated power.

That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

Madison gave his draft of the Virginia Resolutions to Wilson Cary Nicholas, who showed them to Jefferson. In a letter dated November 29, 1798, Jefferson recommended adding more emphatic language in declaring the Alien and Sedition Acts unconstitutional.

The more I have reflected on the phrase in the paper you shewed me, the more strongly I think it should be altered. suppose you were to instead of the invitation to cooperate in the annulment of the acts, to make it an invitation: ‘to concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the said acts are, and were ab initio—null, void and of no force, or effect’ I should like it better. health happiness & Adieu.

Nicholas added words declaring that the Alien and Sedition Act we unconstitutional “not law, but utterly null, void and of no force or effect.”

John Taylor of Caroline introduced Madison’s resolutions with Nicholas’ addition on Dec. 10, 1798. He described the resolutions, “as a rejection of the false choice between timidity and civil war.” Taylor argued that state nullification provided an alternative to popular nullification – in other words outright armed rebellion. In legislative debates, he argued that “the will of the people was better expressed through organized bodies dependent on that will, than by tumultuous meetings; that thus the preservation of peace and good order would be more secure.”

In the course of the debate, Jefferson’s suggested wording was removed. During the period following passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts, there was talk of outright revolution. Both the Kentucky and Virginia legislatures went to great pains to ensure they were striking a balance between a hard line and moderation. They wanted to make their point, but they did not want to spark violence.

Removing Jefferson’s wording did not change the substance of the resolutions. In fact, declaring a law “unconstitutional” was essentially the same as calling it “null, void and of no effect.” Alexander Hamilton inferred this distinction during the New York ratification debate.

“The acts of the United States, therefore, will be absolutely obligatory as to all the proper objects and powers of the general government…but the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding.”

The Virginia House of Delegates passed the resolutions on Dec. 21, 1798, by a vote of 100 to 63. The Senate followed suit on Dec. 24, by a 14 to 3 margin.

Taken together, the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions lay out the principles of nullification. But they did not actually nullify the Alien and Sedition Acts. These non-binding resolutions merely made the case and set the stage for further action.

Correspondence between Jefferson and Madison indicate they didn’t plan to stop with the resolutions. They hoped to use them as a springboard for state action against the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts.

The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions weren’t all that well received, particularly by states in the northeast. This is unsurprising because these states were controlled by the Federalist Party. Several, including Massachusetts, passed resolutions of their own condemning the rhetoric of Kentucky and Virginia.

Jefferson asserted in a letter to Madison dated Aug. 23, 1799, that the opposition should not remain unanswered.

“I will in the mean time give you my ideas to reflect on. that the principles already advanced by Virginia & Kentuckey are not to be yielded in silence, I presume we all agree.”

He then went on to specify three steps.

(1) “…answer the reasonings of such of the states as have ventured into the field of reason, & that of the Commee of Congress. here they have given us all the advantage we could wish. take some notice of those states who have either not answered at all, or answered without reasoning. (2) make a firm protestation against the principle & the precedent; and a reservation of the rights resulting to us from these palpable violations of the constitutional compact by the Federal government, and the approbation or acquiescence of the several co-states; so that we may hereafter do, what we might now rightfully do, whenever repetitions of these and other violations shall make it evident that the Federal government, disregarding the limitations of the federal compact, mean to exercise powers over us to which we have never assented. (3) express in affectionate & conciliatory language our warm attachment to union with our sister-states, and to the instrument & principles by which we are united; that we are willing to sacrifice to this every thing except those rights of self government the securing of which was the object of that compact; that not at all disposed to make every measure of error or wrong a cause of scission, we are willing to view with indulgence to wait with patience till those passions & delusions shall have passed over which the federal government have artfully & successfully excited to cover it’s own abuses & to conceal it’s designs; fully confident that the good sense of the American people and their attachment to those very rights which we are now vindicating will, before it shall be too late, rally with us round the true principles of our federal compact…” [numbering added]

Madison took Jefferson’s advice and penned a lengthy defense of the Virginia Resolutions known as the Virginia Report of 1800. (Sometimes called the Virginia Report of 1799.) Madison fleshed out the Virginia Resolutions at length and answered the opposition’s arguments point by point. Most notably, he asserted the people of the states have the final authority to determine the constitutionality of an act.

“The States then being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently that as the parties to it, they must themselves decide in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.”  

While the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions did not actually nullify the Alien and Sedition Act, they form the philosophical foundation nullification actions rest upon. Ultimately, it remains up to states to take action in the ways they see fit to stop the exercise of unconstitutional federal power – or as Madison eloquently put it “interpose for arresting the progress of the evil.”

# # #

Ed Note: This article is featured in is today’s Tenther newsletter, which everyone in the nullification movement gets daily or weekly. Be one of them – and Become a member here to support the TAC.

 

Posted in 10th Amendment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Facebook Founder Warns “God Only Knows What It’s Doing To Kids’ Brains”

By Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge, November 10, 2017 •

38-year-old founding president of Facebook, Sean Parker, was uncharacteristically frank about his creation in an interview with Axios. So much so in fact that he concluded, Mark Zuckerberg will probably block his account after reading this.

 

“When Facebook was getting going, I had these people who would come up to me and they would say, ‘I’m not on social media.’ And I would say, ‘OK. You know, you will be.’ And then they would say, ‘No, no, no. I value my real-life interactions. I value the moment. I value presence. I value intimacy.’ And I would say, … ‘We’ll get you eventually.'”

“I don’t know if I really understood the consequences of what I was saying, because [of] the unintended consequences of a network when it grows to a billion or 2 billion people and … it literally changes your relationship with society, with each other … It probably interferes with productivity in weird ways. God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains.”

“The thought process that went into building these applications, Facebook being the first of them, … was all about: ‘How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?'”

“And that means that we need to sort of give you a little dopamine hit every once in a while, because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever. And that’s going to get you to contribute more content, and that’s going to get you … more likes and comments.”

It’s a social-validation feedback loop … exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology.

“The inventors, creators — it’s me, it’s Mark [Zuckerberg], it’s Kevin Systrom on Instagram, it’s all of these people — understood this consciously. And we did it anyway.”

In this ‘confessional’, it appears Parker has become “something of a conscientious objector” on social media.

However , as Axios notes, Parker ends with just enough crazy to make you wonder…

“Because I’m a billionaire, I’m going to have access to better health care so … I’m going to be like 160 and I’m going to be part of this, like, class of immortal overlords. [Laughter]

Because, you know the [Warren Buffett] expression about compound interest. … [G]ive us billionaires an extra hundred years and you’ll know what … wealth disparity looks like.

# # #

Posted in 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, Education, Learn Liberty, News, Surveillance State, Tyranny | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Today in History: Kentucky Resolutions Signed on Nov. 16, 1798

By Mike Maharrey at the Tenth Amendment Center, November 16, 2017 •

Would the proposed Constitution create the limited federal government promised?

That was the central question facing the ratifying conventions as America considered adopting the new Constitution. Those in favor of ratification swore it would. But many remained skeptical, arguing that the new general government would undoubtedly try to expand its power and that the Constitution would not sufficiently restrain it.

It only took a decade for the federal government to prove the anti-federalists right.

During the summer of 1798, Congress passed, and President John Adams signed into law, four acts together known as the Alien and Sedition Acts. With winds of war blowing across the Atlantic, the Federalist Party majority wrote the laws to prevent “seditious” acts from weakening the U.S. government. Federalists utilized fear of the French to stir up support for these draconian laws, expanding federal power, concentrating authority in the executive branch and severely restricting freedom of speech.

Two of the Alien Acts gave the president the power to declare foreign U.S. residents an enemy, lock them up and deport them. These acts vested judicial authority in the executive branch and obliterated due process. The Sedition Act essentially outlawed criticizing the federal government – a clear violation of the First Amendment.

Recognizing the grave danger these act posed to the basic constitutional structure, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison drafted resolutions that were passed by the Kentucky and Virginia legislatures on Nov. 10 and Dec. 21, 1798, respectively. The “Principles of ’98” formalized the principles of nullification as the rightful remedy when the federal government oversteps its authority.

The Alien and Sedition Acts outraged many in Kentucky. Several counties in the Commonwealth adopted resolutions condemning the acts, including Fayette, Clark, Bourbon, Madison and Woodford. A Madison County Kentucky militia regiment issued an ominous resolution of its own, stating, “The Alien and Sedition Bills are an infringement of the Constitution and of natural rights, and that we cannot approve or submit to them.” Several thousand people gathered at an outdoor meeting protesting the acts in Lexington on August 13.

The push to nullify the Alien and Sedition Acts was not simply the act of opportunistic politicians. It rose out of the passionate demands of the citizenry in Kentucky, as well as Virginia.

Jefferson penned the original draft of the Kentucky Resolutions within a month of Congress passing the Sedition Act.

“That the several States composing, the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes — delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.”

After outlining each constitutional violation and overreach of federal power, Jefferson called for action – nullify now!

“Therefore this commonwealth is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the general government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non fœderis) to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them.” [Emphasis added]

Jefferson sent former Virginia ratifying convention delegate Wilson Cary Nicholas a draft of the resolution, likely hoping the state legislator could get them introduced in Virginia. In October, 1798, Wilson indicated that state representative John Breckinridge was willing to introduce the resolutions in Kentucky. Breckinridge suffered from tuberculosis and made a recuperative trip to Sweet Springs, Va. late in August of that year. Nicholas likely gave the Kentucky lawmaker a copy of Jefferson’s draft during that trip.

On Nov. 7, 1798, Gov. James Garrard addressed the Kentucky state legislature, noting the vehement opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts. He said Kentucky was, “if not in a state of insurrection, yet utterly disaffected to the federal government.” And noted that the state “being deeply interested in the conduct of the national government, must have a right to applaud or to censure that government, when applause or censure becomes its due,” urging the legislature to reaffirm its support of the U.S. Constitution while, “entering your protest against all unconstitutional laws and impolitic proceedings.”

That same day, Breckinridge announced to the House he intended to submit resolutions addressing Garrard’s message. The following day, the Fayette County lawmaker followed through, introducing an amended version of Jefferson’s draft. Most notably, Breckinridge omitted the word nullification from the actual version considered by the Kentucky legislature, seeking to moderate the tone of the resolution. Removal of the nullification reference apparently didn’t bother Jefferson, and in fact, did little to change the fundamental thrust of the resolution. By declaring the Alien and Sedition Acts unconstitutional, null and void, the Kentucky legislature voted on a nullification bill, even with the actual word omitted.

The resolution passed the House on Nov. 10 with only three dissenting votes. The Senate unanimously concurred three days later, and Gov. Garrard signed the resolution on November 16.

Kentucky followed up with a second resolution affirming its position in 1799, notably including the word “nullification,” omitted in the final version of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 passed by the state legislature.

“The several states who formed that instrument (the Constitution), being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction; and, That a nullification, by those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts done under color of that instrument, is the rightful remedy.”

Jefferson’s principles have endured for more than 200 years despite relentless attacks and demagoguery. Americans have appealed to the ideas brilliantly articulated in the Kentucky Resolutions to protect free speech, to promote economic justice, to stop military conscription and to protect the rights of blacks during the fugitive slave era. Jefferson’s words leave no doubt – nullification was the rightful remedy, and it remains so today.

Author’s Note: Much of this article was excerpted from “Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty.” Pick up a copy at the Tenth Amendment Center store HERE.

Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center. He proudly resides in the original home of the Principles of ’98 – Kentucky.See his blog archive here and his article archive here.He is the author of the book, Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You can visit his personal website at MichaelMaharrey.com and like him on Facebook HERE.

# # #

Posted in 10th Amendment, Documents of Freedom, Founders, Learn Liberty, New York State Constitution, Nullification, The Constitution | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

New York to ISIS: Keep Killing Us! We’re Resilient!

By Deborah C. Tyler at American Thinker, November 10, 2017 •

The press conference that NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio and NY Governor Andrew Cuomo held after the ISIS-directed mass murder by “Diversity Scratch-Off” winner Sayfullo Saipov was a master class in inculcating a gullible urban herd to helplessness, passivity, insane misattribution of danger, and un-American government dependence in response to murderous jihad.

De Blasio and Cuomo essentially said to ISIS: We request the honor of your presence in our state.  To prove the sincerity of our invitation, we promise to conceal your identity and lie for you within minutes of your slaughtering us in the street.

There’s a Southern saying for hypocrites like Bill de Blasio: he’s slimier than a bowl of boiled okra.  The mayor began with a phony request to be allowed “to be frank” and, with a mask-like expression, stated the obvious: “It was an act of terror.”  He used the word “terror” once, and never said “Islamic,” “ISIS,” “terrorist,” “terrorism,” or “war,” but he employed the vague, minimizing terms “tragedy” and “loss” for the rest of his remarks.  Cue the firm resolve face: “We know that this action was intended to break our spirit.”  No, Billy, your words are intended to break our spirit; Saipov intended the glory of killing as many infidels as possible.

De Blasio continued, “But we also know New Yorkers are strong.  New Yorkers are resilient.  Our spirit will never be moved by an act of violence, an act meant to intimidate us.”  Remaining unmoved when religious fanatics are slaughtering you is not resilience; it is mental illness.  His face reset again as he regurgitated the cynical cliché about worthless watchfulness, termed vigilance.  “Be vigilant,  Live by ‘If you see something, say something.'” This is the snake oil of security measures, because vigilance without profiling equals conditioned helplessness.

Under de Blasio’s direction, and the demands of the vile Linda Sarsour, the informed, skilled vigilance of the NYPD was stopped, and the responsibility to say something was diffused among diversity-addled shleppers terrified of being labeled Islamophobic.  In 2014, de Blasio shut down the Demographics Unit, which secretly surveilled places suspected of fostering weaponized Islamism.  By “be vigilant,” de Blasio means that New Yorkers should live in helpless trepidation everywhere, all the time.  And if they focus attention on the relevant demographic, young Islamic males, then they are bigots.

When historians label the Obama administration, they should call it the Great Treason.  The Great Treason has been a comprehensive assault on the sovereignty and safety of the United States.  As the years pass, the doctrines of this era of anti-Americanism become more insupportable, evil, and blatantly insane.  A central tenet of the Great Treason de Blasio and Cuomo artfully promote is that there is no such thing as Islamic terrorism.  ISIS, no – ISIL, maybe, because ISIL is the justified retaking of the Levant from the interloper Jews.

A subtext in the denial of Islamic terrorism is that fiends like Saipov are “home-grown” or “lone wolves.”  There is no such thing as American homegrown Islamic terrorism.  Homegrown ISIS is like American homegrown kangaroos.  Islamic terrorism and kangaroos always come from overseas, which is why merit-based immigration is essential to our national defense – and not to keep the kangaroos out.

Cuomo also never uses the word “Islamic.”  He said, “The new terrorist tactic which they’ve called for publicly are these lone wolves who commit an act of terror.”  Who are they?  The lone wolf meme of the Great Treason serves two purposes.  It gratifies “blame America first” because all evil starts here.  It also serves border elimination, because if terrorism is homegrown, it doesn’t matter who comes in or from where.

In his haste to minimize Saipov’s evil, Cuomo said, “This is all very preliminary.  It’s only been a couple of hours, but at this point, there’s no evidence to suggest a wider plot or a wider scheme, but the actions of one individual who meant to cause pain, and harm and probably death[.]”  Probably death?  This is not a sane description of the incident.  Furthermore, aren’t the facts that Saipov wrote a statement of allegiance to ISIS and wanted an ISIS flag in his cell even subtle hints of a wider scheme?

Cuomo seized on one of the benefits of terrorism: a reason to strengthen the power of the police state over law-abiding citizens.  “We will be vigilant.  More police everywhere.  You’ll see them in airports.  You’ll see them in tunnels.  It is not because there’s any evidence of any ongoing threat; it is just out of vigilance and caution.”

Cuomo then articulated the fundamental principle of the Great Treason: there is no such thing as Islamic terrorism.  He said, “And the truth is New York is an international symbol of freedom and democracy.  That’s what we are and we are proud of it.  That also makes us a target for those people who oppose those concepts.”  You see, Saipov was involved in a political protest against Jeffersonian democracy, not in Islamic terrorism.  That’s because, according to the likes of de Blasio and Cuomo, there is no affirmative ideology of Islamic terrorism from the Quran or a mosque or ISIS, or even the dreadful shadow that may pass over the human heart, blocking out Light.

Cuomo concluded, “We’ve lived with this before, we’ve felt the pain before, we feel the pain today, but we go forward together, and we go forward stronger than ever.”  He closed with “Don’t let them change us or deter us in any manner, shape, or form.”

In other words, change nothing; do nothing.  The golden invitation to the next Saipov still stands, the tenets of the Great Treason go unchallenged, and while the streets are still crimson with the blood of innocents, we are magically stronger because we are so resilient.

# # #

Posted in Learn Liberty, New York News, News, NYC | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Patrick Henry on Making America “Great” (Again)

From our friends at the Tenth Amendment Center

“When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different; liberty, sir, was then the primary object.”  –Patrick Henry (1788)

# # #

Posted in 10th Amendment, Documents of Freedom, Founders, Learn Liberty, Nullification, Tyranny | Tagged , | Leave a comment