By NWV News writer Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
February 23, 2009
While the mainstream news media are hyping President Barack Obama’s election and the dismal economic downturn in the United States, more and more states are declaring — or have already declared — sovereignty.
According to political experts such as strategist Mike Baker, Americans are becoming disenchanted with the federal government’s lack of perspective on issues of great concern — illegal aliens, crime, economic turmoil — while intruding into the private lives of citizens with gun-control laws and other intrusions.
“Many [citizens] are angry at federal government intrusion into their lives and into matters that were intended by our Founding Fathers to be relegated to the individual states,” said Baker.
“Take, for instance, the police power. Since the beginning of our republic, police and law enforcement was considered a function of each state in the union. Now we have federal law enforcement agencies who are taking away police powers from states. Why does an agency created to oversee issues related to alcohol, tobacco and firearms need to have SWAT teams?” asks the conservative political strategist.
“I believe that because the federal government refuses to perform their duty of protecting US sovereignty that more and more state legislatures find it necessary to protect their own individual sovereignty. The feds are careful not to mistreat illegal alien criminals, for example, but they see no problem with wiping out an entire compound of American citizens as happened in [the Branch Davidian compound] Waco, Texas,” warns former NYPD detective Sidney Frances.
“Look at California: they are preparing to release almost 50,000 convicts because of overcrowding. Why isn’t the federal government providing funds to keep those criminals locked up? Instead, they provide billions of dollars for abortions overseas,” he added.
Not only does the US Constitution provide for the sovereignty, the US Supreme Court also ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states.
So far, according to documents obtained by NewswithViews.com, nine states have declared soverignty with another 13 states considering legislation to do so. Some legislation addresses all aspects of states’ rights, while other legislation addresses certain actions such as abortion control and gun owners’ rights.
Washington State Declaring Total Sovereignty
In the state of Washington, house and senate bill HJM-4009 declares:
“The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States specifically provides that, [T]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people; and the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being those powers specifically granted to it by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and… [F]ederalism is the constitutional division of powers between the national and state governments and is widely regarded as one of America’s most valuable contributions to political science….”
HJM-4009 goes on to state: “Many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations and some now being considered by the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States….”
And here’s the resolution: “NOW, THEREFORE, Your Memorialists respectfully resolve:
(1) That the State of Washington hereby claims sovereignty under HJM 4009 p. 2 the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and
(2) That this serve as a Notice and Demand to the federal government to maintain the balance of powers where the Constitution of the United States established it and to cease and desist, effective immediately, any and all mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.”
“BE IT RESOLVED, That copies of this Memorial be immediately transmitted to the Honorable Barack Obama, President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of each state’s legislature of the United States of America, and each member of Congress from the State of Washington.”
“In other words, the state of Washington is telling Washington, DC and the other 49 states that the federal government should take a walk and not interfere in matters of that state,” quips Mike Baker.
New Hampshire Tells Feds to Get Lost?
It’s not only western and southern states that are seeking sovereignty. For example, in the northeast, long considered a bastion of liberal politics, New Hampshire has joined the fray. HCR-6 is a resolution “affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.”
The bill states: “[T]he Constitution of the State of New Hampshire… declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and… the Constitution of the State… declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New Hampshire….”
HCR specifically addresses the police power in the resolution: “[T]he Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences (sic) against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people…”
[T]herefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory.”
The bill goes much further than the one in Washington state in that it stipulates the nullification of certain federal acts:
“[N]ullifications include, but are not limited to:
“I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.
“II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
“III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
“IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
“V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
“VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition… (emphasis added).
HCR-6 end this controversial statement:
“Should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government.”
“What this bill is saying is that except for certain national interests, New Hampshire shall independently deal with many of the problems that arise. They wish to be free of federal government intrusion,” explains Baker.
Missouri’s Declaration of Sovereignty Regarding Abortion
Missouri’s bill is more narrowly worded to address federal government interference in how that state regulates abortion.
Quite simply, HR-212 “declares Missouri’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment and urges the United States Congress to reject the passage of the federal Freedom of Choice Act which prohibits regulations on abortion” within that state.
Move to Limit Government in Oklahoma
“With a Republican-controlled Legislature set to convene next month for the first time in state history, chances are good the [sovereignty] measure will pass,” Rep. Charles Key told the local news media
Key, a Republican from Oklahoma City believes that “many federal laws violate the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution, which states the powers not delegated to the federal government “are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The Constitution lists about 20 duties required of the federal government.
“We, the people in the states, created the federal government,” Key said. “They act like they created us and we’re under their authority, and that’s really not the case.”
According to a news sources in Oklahoma, Key’s resolution states the federal government should “cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.”
“It’s to help try to get us back to following the Constitution and try to preserve our constitutional form of government,” Key told reporters.
“The federal government continues to violate it more and more. It’s gotten so bad that they pretty much do whatever they want and get away with just about anything they want to get away with,” he said.
According to news reports, the resolution, House Joint Resolution 1003, is similar to a resolution Key filed last year.
It sailed through the Republican-controlled state House, passing 92-3, but was not taken up in the evenly split Senate. Republicans picked up two Senate seats in November’s election to have a 26-22 majority.
Key said there’s a “much better” chance that the resolution will pass the Senate this year, but he said he and others “will have to work hard to get it heard over there.”
Arguably, Georgia’s bill — SR-308 – is the most comprehensive declaration of that state’s sovereignty, and it leaves little doubt that it’s citizens are serious about preventing federal intrusion in the state’s affairs as well an individual citizens’ lives.
Highlights of the resolution include:
“NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE that the State of Georgia hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution and that this measure shall serve as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.
“BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Senate is authorized and directed to transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President of the United States Senate, each member of Georgia’s congressional delegation, and the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state legislature in the United States of America.”
Montana’s HB-246 is being applauded by gun owners across the nation. It specifically rejects the federal government’s intrusion on how Montana controls — or doesn’t control — firearms owner by private citizens.
The bill’s preamble states that HB-246 is: “An act exempting [Montana] from federal regulation under the commerce clause of [the US Constitution] a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured and retained in Montana.”
In another section of the bill, the proposed law stipulates: “A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce.”
The law would prevent federal agencies such as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms from entering Montana and confiscating weapons legally sold in that state.
And just in case a Washington, DC bureaucrat decides to circumvent this Montana gun owners’ sovereignty, the law states: “Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.”
“Needless to say, the National Rifle Association and other gun-rights groups are applauding this legislation,” said former NYPD detective Frances.
“It’s hoped more states will wake up and pass such legislation,” he added.