FrankRep
08-19-2010, 07:09 AM
http://www.utahnullification.com/wp-content/themes/handgloves/css/images/logo.gif (http://www.utahnullification.com/)
Utah Liberty: Project Nullification - Looking for volunteers! (http://www.utahnullification.com/)
====
Utah has chance to use nullification (http://www.heraldextra.com/news/opinion/utah-valley/article_db9ce2c1-9bbd-57a1-82d7-9db8ed8f4f16.html)
Daily Herald - Provo, UT
July 21, 2010
The founding fathers of this nation wisely created a government with several important checks and balances to separate and curb the powers delegated to it under the U.S. Constitution. Congress passes the laws, the Executive enforces them, and the Judiciary arbitrates when conflicts arise.
It is to this latter branch of the federal government people often look when concerned with a law's constitutionality. In light of numerous and increasing examples, though, where the judicial branch upholds the constitutionality of a law that clearly exceeds the limited powers delegated by the states, the question must be asked: what recourse, if any, do the states have?
The answer is nullification, where state legislatures refuse to recognize and enforce a federal law within their borders that they deem to be a usurpation of authority. Thomas Jefferson considered this action a "rightful remedy" of the states, implementing it in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 in response to John Adams's Alien and Sedition Acts. In the related Virginia Resolutions of 1798, James Madison insisted that the states were "duty bound to resist" when the federal government violated the Constitution.
Why not leave such matters to the judiciary to resolve? Jefferson wisely warned that if the federal government is allowed to determine the extent of its own powers, we shouldn't be surprised when it continues to discover new ones. The judiciary is not infallible, and history shows an abundance of examples where it has supported and excused an arrogation of authority by its federal peers.
Nullification has often been used by states, including several times in recent years here in Utah. We have nullified the No Child Left Behind Act, REAL ID, federal firearms regulation for domestically produced and sold firearms, as well as the recent federal health care legislation.
Those who scoff at the idea of states standing up to the federal government point with horror and revulsion to South Carolina's nullification of a federal tariff and several southern states' attempts to nullify the Brown v. Board of Education decision in the 1950s. Such myopic and imbalanced protests ignore the fact that the northern states have historically nullified more laws than their southern counterparts, and that nullification has been used successfully in myriad positive ways, such as protecting individuals from an invasion of their privacy, punishment for political speech, violations of due process and habeas corpus, burdensome regulation and taxation, unfunded federal mandates, and more.
The exclusive right to determine a law's constitutionality, while historically and eagerly assumed by the United States Supreme Court, is nowhere found in the text of the Constitution. As parties to the Constitution in having delegated a portion of their sovereign power to the federal government, and after having acceded to the Union it created, the states retained the ability to object, and ultimately refuse, when their creation exceeds its bounds.
Today we witness a federal government that shows little to no concern for constitutional restraint, a Congress whose members literally laugh in derision when asked to state where they derive authority to legislate on a certain issue, and a judiciary whose precedent often blinds them from a clear understanding of individual rights, state sovereignty, and limited federal power.
States have, for decades, submitted time and time again to federal expansion at their expense, and the expense of their citizens' individual and inalienable rights. Historically and recently, nullification has been employed as a method of checking the federal government when it ignores or circumvents its own checks and balances. In this political climate, Utah, along with all states, has ample opportunity to use nullification again.
• Lehi resident Connor Boyack is founder of the Utah Nullification Project. Visit UtahNullification.com (http://www.utahnullification.com) for more information.
SOURCE:
http://www.heraldextra.com/news/opinion/utah-valley/article_db9ce2c1-9bbd-57a1-82d7-9db8ed8f4f16.html
Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1596981490?tag=nullifynow-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=1596981490&adid=0F58YNSVEP6CYX3YAZ4Q&)
http://www.thomasewoods.com/images/cover_null_lg.jpg (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1596981490?tag=nullifynow-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=1596981490&adid=0F58YNSVEP6CYX3YAZ4Q&)
Utah Liberty: Project Nullification - Looking for volunteers! (http://www.utahnullification.com/)
====
Utah has chance to use nullification (http://www.heraldextra.com/news/opinion/utah-valley/article_db9ce2c1-9bbd-57a1-82d7-9db8ed8f4f16.html)
Daily Herald - Provo, UT
July 21, 2010
The founding fathers of this nation wisely created a government with several important checks and balances to separate and curb the powers delegated to it under the U.S. Constitution. Congress passes the laws, the Executive enforces them, and the Judiciary arbitrates when conflicts arise.
It is to this latter branch of the federal government people often look when concerned with a law's constitutionality. In light of numerous and increasing examples, though, where the judicial branch upholds the constitutionality of a law that clearly exceeds the limited powers delegated by the states, the question must be asked: what recourse, if any, do the states have?
The answer is nullification, where state legislatures refuse to recognize and enforce a federal law within their borders that they deem to be a usurpation of authority. Thomas Jefferson considered this action a "rightful remedy" of the states, implementing it in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 in response to John Adams's Alien and Sedition Acts. In the related Virginia Resolutions of 1798, James Madison insisted that the states were "duty bound to resist" when the federal government violated the Constitution.
Why not leave such matters to the judiciary to resolve? Jefferson wisely warned that if the federal government is allowed to determine the extent of its own powers, we shouldn't be surprised when it continues to discover new ones. The judiciary is not infallible, and history shows an abundance of examples where it has supported and excused an arrogation of authority by its federal peers.
Nullification has often been used by states, including several times in recent years here in Utah. We have nullified the No Child Left Behind Act, REAL ID, federal firearms regulation for domestically produced and sold firearms, as well as the recent federal health care legislation.
Those who scoff at the idea of states standing up to the federal government point with horror and revulsion to South Carolina's nullification of a federal tariff and several southern states' attempts to nullify the Brown v. Board of Education decision in the 1950s. Such myopic and imbalanced protests ignore the fact that the northern states have historically nullified more laws than their southern counterparts, and that nullification has been used successfully in myriad positive ways, such as protecting individuals from an invasion of their privacy, punishment for political speech, violations of due process and habeas corpus, burdensome regulation and taxation, unfunded federal mandates, and more.
The exclusive right to determine a law's constitutionality, while historically and eagerly assumed by the United States Supreme Court, is nowhere found in the text of the Constitution. As parties to the Constitution in having delegated a portion of their sovereign power to the federal government, and after having acceded to the Union it created, the states retained the ability to object, and ultimately refuse, when their creation exceeds its bounds.
Today we witness a federal government that shows little to no concern for constitutional restraint, a Congress whose members literally laugh in derision when asked to state where they derive authority to legislate on a certain issue, and a judiciary whose precedent often blinds them from a clear understanding of individual rights, state sovereignty, and limited federal power.
States have, for decades, submitted time and time again to federal expansion at their expense, and the expense of their citizens' individual and inalienable rights. Historically and recently, nullification has been employed as a method of checking the federal government when it ignores or circumvents its own checks and balances. In this political climate, Utah, along with all states, has ample opportunity to use nullification again.
• Lehi resident Connor Boyack is founder of the Utah Nullification Project. Visit UtahNullification.com (http://www.utahnullification.com) for more information.
SOURCE:
http://www.heraldextra.com/news/opinion/utah-valley/article_db9ce2c1-9bbd-57a1-82d7-9db8ed8f4f16.html
Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1596981490?tag=nullifynow-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=1596981490&adid=0F58YNSVEP6CYX3YAZ4Q&)
http://www.thomasewoods.com/images/cover_null_lg.jpg (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1596981490?tag=nullifynow-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=1596981490&adid=0F58YNSVEP6CYX3YAZ4Q&)