Washington State Preservation of Liberty Act

[surf]

i sent a message to my guys (Tom, Habib, and not sure the other name...) - no responses yet

Fellow Liberty Campaigners,

The NDAA-related bills have now been introduced in Olympia!

“Washington State Preservation of Liberty Act” – making detention of United States citizens and lawful resident aliens under the national defense authorization act a Class C felony

HB1581-2013-14 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...1581&year=2013
SB5511-2013-14 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summ...5511&year=2013

These bills have been introduced as a bipartisan effort in the House and Senate by Rep. Jason Overstreet (R) and Sen. Bob Hasegawa (D). A number of bipartisan co-sponsors have signed onto these bills, but we need your help to apply pressure to Reps and Senators to: 1) get more co-sponsors TODAY while they can still sign on, 2) push it out of committee for a floor vote, and 3) get it passed!

Please immediately email and call your reps and senators in Olympia (http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/) and push them to co-sponsor the legislation to be introduced by Rep. Overstreet in the House, and Sen. Hasegawa in the Senate. Tell them: “I want you to sign on as a co-sponsor of HB1581 / SB5511 to preserve our freedoms that are supposed to be protected under the Federal and State Constitutions! Will you do so? (Yes/No)?” If they refuse to give a Yes/No answer, you could say: “I consider a non-response an answer in itself!”

THIS IS A VERY TRANSPARTISAN ISSUE, and most Americans agree we need to fight back against the NDAA indefinite detention provisions. Please call your and ask your friends and family to do the same.

For Liberty,

Scott Shock
King County Coordinator
www.campaignforliberty.com
206-650-3421

P.S. Please immediately email and call your reps and senators in Olympia (http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/) and push them to co-sponsor the legislation to be introduced by Rep. Overstreet in the House, and Sen. Hasegawa in the Senate. Tell them: “I want you to sign on as a co-sponsor of HB1581 / SB5511 to preserve our freedoms that are supposed to be protected under the Federal and State Constitutions! Will you do so? (Yes/No)?” If they refuse to give a Yes/No answer, you could say: “I consider a non-response an answer in itself!”

[surf]

discouraging response (and I am an idiot for continuing to confuse Ross Hunter with Tom)

I share your concerns about civil liberties, but Article VI of the US Constitution is pretty clear on our ability to pre-empt federal legislation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

I'm not excited about federal legislation that ignores basic civil liberties, but the efforts of states to "nullify" federal laws did not turn out well the last time it was attempted - the civil war is generally recognized as a bad outcome.

Rep. Ross Hunter
Chair, Appropriations
ross.hunter@leg.wa.gov

[sailingaway]

send back the ninth and tenth amendments and the provision on habeus corpus.

Sounds like he is looking for an excuse. Who can run against him?

[surf]

send back the ninth and tenth amendments and the provision on habeus corpus.

Sounds like he is looking for an excuse. Who can run against him?

it sounds to me like he wants to play....

Our State Constitution is a pretty good document
http://www.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyR...stitution.aspx

SECTION 1 POLITICAL POWER. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.

SECTION 2 SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land.

SECTION 3 PERSONAL RIGHTS. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

SECTION 18 MILITARY POWER, LIMITATION OF. The military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

where is the response from my fellow residents of this most hedonistic state in the world? i'm open to suggestions.

[surf]

still looking for help here, but Article VI, it could be argued by tyrants, prevents protest of this crap: All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

this guy is equating a prohibition on violating basic human rights (NDAA) with violating human rights (assuming he's taking the "Lincoln freed the slaves" viewpoint).

[jcannon98188]

Inform him of the long standing history of nullifaction. Without it, alcohol would still be illegal.

[Occam's Banana]

discouraging response (and I am an idiot for continuing to confuse Ross Hunter with Tom)

The guy has no idea what he is talking about. He is either ignorant of history and of the meanings of words, or he is being deliberately obtuse.

I share your concerns about civil liberties, but Article VI of the US Constitution is pretty clear on our ability to pre-empt federal legislation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Can he not read plain English? Article VI explicitly states that "The Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof [...] shall be the supreme Law of the Land"

In other words: "The Constitution, and those US federal laws which are Constitutional [...] shall be the supreme Law of the Land".

There is no possible way of interpreting this to mean that any old law the federal government happens to pass just automatically becomes the "supreme Law of the Land".

That is the whole point of nullification. According to Article VI, *any* US federal laws that are NOT Constitutional are NOT the "supreme Law of the Land".

(And no, the Supreme Court is NOT the final arbiter of what is or is not Constitutional - to claim otherwise is to say that the framers of the Constitution intended to put the fox in charge of the henhouse ...)

I'm not excited about federal legislation that ignores basic civil liberties, but the efforts of states to "nullify" federal laws did not turn out well the last time it was attempted - the civil war is generally recognized as a bad outcome.

This is complete bull$#@!. What is this "last time [nullification] was attempted" that he refers to (the one for which the Civil War was the outcome)?

Ask him to name it. He won't be able to, because he is talking out of his ass - there was no such "attempted nullification" ...

[RabbitMan]

Off-topic: Surf, are you THE Scott Shock?

[surf]

Off-topic: Surf, are you THE Scott Shock?

no, but I sure get a lot of email from the guy. have you tried your reps yet?