Virginia attorney general Ken Cuccinelli is urging Tea Partiers not to support the idea of state interposition. According to a report, “Attorney Gen. Cuccinelli, in private consultations with the Roanoke group, agreed, noting how Southern states had unsuccessfully invoked the doctrine in the 1960s to resist federal civil-rights legislation. ‘Interposition had a place in history, I told them, and it is not an exalted one,’ Mr. Cuccinelli said.”
That is most unfortunate. I have explained why the civil-rights issue as an argument against nullification today is apples and oranges; this discussion comes in a speech of mine that will be repeated on C-SPAN2 this Sunday at 3:30pm ET. Beyond that, what a shame Cuccinelli does not know the real history of the doctrine, and what it was used for. From what I can see, every single time the Principles of ’98 were invoked in antebellum America they sought to expand human freedom. Why is that not “exalted”? Wisconsin objected to unconstitutional aspects of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, quoting Jefferson’s Resolutions of 1798 verbatim. Not exalted? Why buy into the regime’s idea that if we peons are allowed to dissent from federal policy, we’ll surely use this power for evil? Why buy into the idea that we need federal government supervision for our own good?
This Sunday in Orlando those of us who beg to differ will be having a pretty big event in support of nullification; former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson and I are among the speakers. By an interesting coincidence, I recently did a radio interview (to air next month) on nullification with Pat Williams, senior VP of the Orlando Magic.
cross-posted from he LewRockwell.com blog
EDITOR’S NOTE: Tom Woods will be the keynote speaker at Nullify Now! in Orlando on 10-10-10. Click here to get tickets – http://www.nullifynow.com/orlando/ – or call 888-71-TICKETS
Just because some may have attempted to interpose against federal mandates deemed unconstitutional and failed in the past, it is still a legitimate action for states to take. This is why education is the key, IMO. In today's climate, general rage against the feds is so widespread, people are thrilled to hear about this latent form of protest against blatant abuses of power. Protests against socialistic government-creep don't carry the kinds of ambivalence that racism and civil rights issues tend to invoke so I think nullification has a much better chance of success today.
Just because some may have attempted to interpose against federal mandates deemed unconstitutional and failed in the past, it is still a legitimate action for states to take. This is why education is the key, IMO. In today's climate, general rage against the feds is so widespread, people are thrilled to hear about this latent form of protest against blatant abuses of power. Protests against socialistic government-creep don't carry the kinds of ambivalence that racism and civil rights issues tend to invoke so I think nullification has a much better chance of success today.
We have to make good arguments as to why we can interpose. That is the key because it is virtually impossible to ignore a solid argument forever.
Agree.
Even if it was used for a bad purpose by some people the ability to legally arrest any law enforcement official still exist. That power still belongs to the law enforcement people in any jurisdiction.