|
STATES SEND WARNING TO FEDS
States say feds will not usurp powers guaranteed to them by 9th, 10th Amendments
By Pat Shannan
More than 20 states have passed recent resolutions in defiance of the central government’s intrusion into their liberties and governing powers, with all including a demand to obey the Constitution’s Ninth and Tenth Amendments. New Hampshire has issued what may be the harshest “Don’t Tread on Me” caveat of all.
Citing its own state constitution, the New Hampshire Legislature has issued its recent resolution “affirming states’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles” and reminding any Washington interventionists of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments in the U.S. Constitution as well as Part 1, Article 7 of their own state document that 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 . . .”
 |
It continued: “Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring: that the 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 offenses 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,’ therefore 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; and . . .
“That any act by the Congress of the United States, executive order of the president of the United States of America or judicial order by the judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several states or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:
“I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the states without the consent of the legislature of that state.
“II. Requiring involuntary
“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; and “That 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.”
Ever since Vermont threatened secession and others of the 20-plus have issued lesser threatening notices of intentions, all have made it clear that they are not happy with the current situation, and the action of all indicates that the New World Order may have a bigger problem on its hands than it initially considered.
The 21 states so far that have either introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments or are about to do so include: Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Washington, Pennsylvania, Maine, Nevada, Kansas, Indiana, Idaho, Georgia, Colorado, California, Arkansas, Alabama, Alaska, and, of course, New Hampshire.
In another defiance of unconstitutional federal controls, governors are telling Washington bureaucrats that, under the 10th Amendment, they cannot dictate spending or other actions to the states. (“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.”)
“We are telling the federal government that we are a sovereign state,” said Arizona state representative Judy Burges, who is leading an effort in her state to pass a resolution called “Sovereignty: the 10th Amendment.”
Oklahoma state Sen. Randy Brogdon (R) introduced a resolution he said would enable his state to “reclaim the 10th Amendment right to reject any and all acts of Congress that go beyond its enumerated powers in violation
of the 10th Amendment.”
Republican governors Mark Sanford of South Carolina, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Rick Perry of Texas expressed reservations about accepting stimulus funds because they are concerned that the federal government will dictate how it is spent.
The federal government extracts money from their taxpayers, sends a bit of it back and then dictates how it is spent, they argue.
Pat Shannan is a corresponding editor of American Free Press. He is also the author of several videos and books including One in a Million: An IRS Travesty and I Rode With Tupper, detailing Shannan’s experiences with Tupper Saussy when the American dissident was on the run in the 1960s. Both are available from FIRST AMENDMENT BOOKS for $25 each. No S&H inside the U.S.
(Issue # 11, March 16, 2009)
|
|
