Establisment of Tenth Amendment Commission considered in Iowa

  • Share on Tumblr

House File 419 was introduced by Wagner, Huseman, De Boef, Klein, Paustian, Chambers, Pearson and would establish a commission to monitor federal actions affecting the … “state that require or would require this state or a state officer to execute or enforce a provision of federal law that violates the Constitution of the State of Iowa or that lies outside the federal government’s enumerated powers under the Constitution of the United States and intrudes on the sovereignty reserved to the states …”

The proposed bill points to numerous objections to unconstitutional actions by the federal government, here are just a few:

The Constitution of the United States enumerates certain specific powers delegated to the federal government.

The Ninth amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The Tenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: “The powers not delegated to the 4 United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The general assembly finds all of the following regarding the role of the federal government relative to the states:

  1. The state of Iowa is not bound in unlimited submission to the federal government. Under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States, and of the amendments to that constitution, the states constituted a federal government for special purposes and delegated to that government certain definite powers while generally reserving to each state the right to self-government that is controlled by the people.
  2. Whenever the federal government assumes powers not delegated to it by the states, the assumption of those powers should not be considered authoritative, but instead should be considered as void and having no force and effect. The Constitution of the United States provides a compact to which Iowa and each other state acceded as a state, and to which each is an integral party. The federal government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to the federal  government, since that conclusion would substitute the federal government’s judgment about those powers for the enumeration of powers in the Constitution of the United States. Instead, as in all other compacts between parties having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself whether there is an infraction and the mode and measure of redress of the infraction.

House File 419 would establish a 12 member commission to advise the General Assembly on federal actions that they determine either violates or would cause violation of the U.S. Constitution or the Constitution of Iowa. If a majority of the commission agrees, the commission shall “… introduce a joint resolution in the chamber selected by the commission to declare the government action described in the finding to be null and void and unenforceable as the government action applies to the state of Iowa.”

The bill is a “light” version of the Tenth Amendment Center’s 10th Amendment Commission model legislation, which creates a similar panel, but goes a step further, empowering the body to “issue edicts with the force of law, requiring that no state or local officials, employees, or contractors cooperate in the enforcement of such usurpation, and urging state citizens to also refuse to cooperate.”

The bill was submitted last year, but languished in a subcommittee ever since. Recent actions by the federal government, most notably the passage of the NDAA with its provisions for  infinite detention of citizens, make it seem like a good time to move the bill onto the floor for a vote.

To see the TAC Tenth Amendment Commission model legislation, click HERE.

Visit the TACs legislative tracking page HERE

ACTION ITEMS

If you live in Iowa – act NOW. Not tomorrow or next week. Today, not tomorrow – right now.

1. Visit the link below for contact information for your legislator:
https://www.legis.iowa.gov/Legislators/find.aspx

2. Click on your legislator’s name and get their email address and TWO phone numbers – capitol and district offices.

3. CALL them. Best option – respectfully, yet firmly urge them to pass this bill. Let them know that you want them to stand up for the Constitution of the United States AND the Constitution of Iowa – they took an oath to both.

4. EMAIL them – even if call, you can still email too. Or just send them a firm but courteous email urging them to vote yes on this bill.

5. Do the same for the Governor’s office – (515) 281-5211
https://governor.iowa.gov/contact/

6. Report Back – when you get responses, let us know! We want people to be informed of what their delegates are saying and doing.

About William Kennedy

William Kennedy [send him email] is the State Director for the North Carolina Tenth Amendment Center. A strong supporter of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights with special emphasis on State Sovereignty protected by the Tenth Amendment.

Enjoyed This Post?

We cannot succeed without your help, as we will never accept government grants or handouts. Please help us by investing in the Constitution and freedom today!

Enjoyed This Post?
12 comments
Rep_DanGordon
Rep_DanGordon

@S_Sydness That is absolutely fantastic! Congrats!

S_Sydness
S_Sydness

@RepDanGordon Generally it seems good & It's definitely a start but I have reservation about it that I voiced in the comments. Am I wrong?

Rep_DanGordon
Rep_DanGordon

@S_Sydness I see that now. I hadn't read the actual bill, just the article. I'll take a closer look tomorrow. Good catch.

S_Sydness
S_Sydness

@RepDanGordon Whenever you have time..., no hurry, no worries. Like I said I hate to impose. Thanks again!

S_Sydness
S_Sydness

To help me understand this better can you please explain a few things to me. Being a computer guy I understand that "light" versions of software consist of narrow abilities to access aspects of the software; and to get the fullness of the software requires extra expense. So basically Iowa will let someone be detained, then after the fact bring the detention before a committee to determine if the detention is lawful? Am I understanding it correctly that even if this would pass and be signed by the Governor that there are no provisions prohibiting local authorities from assisting in, or restricting the detention?

Thanks for your time,

S_Sydness
S_Sydness

After completely reading through House File 419 I have major concerns. One of my major issues would be based upon my above statement. It appears that an individual can be detained, then the committee would be presented with the reason for Federal detention. After which point the committee would determine whether the detention is lawful without giving the detainee the opportunity (with Legal Counsel) to refute the claims made for detention, This would give the Federal Government the ability to "create" the case for the detention without releasing information that might weaken the case for lawful detention.

 

House file 419 includes a provision after enactment so it can be amended as situations arise; which is also an area of great concern. This would mean that if the committee upheld the Federal Governments detention of an individual with uncontested facts, this would side step our right to Habeas Corpus which could mean a person would have to wait years before they would be granted legal counsel to even contest the committees decision. During that time any number of victims could fall through the loophole before anything would get amended which could create an absolute bottleneck in the judicial system and not protect our rights as intended.

 

I would like to see House file 419 be more proactive in protecting the state residents, like it protects itself from coercion by the Federal Government.

 

By my interpretation: The Federal Government could detain an Iowan, submit their "proof" for detention uncontested, then when you are finally allowed legal counsel... 3, 4, 5 years after the fact, you can file a claim contesting the legality of the committees decision for detention; and on those rare occasions that the committee is able to see past the Federal spin..., We the people can be assured that our roads and bridges get Federal financing.  I hate to be cynical but this bill seems to add an extreme amount of red-tape without protecting it's people from the true issue of "Incarceration without Representation"..., Indefinite Detention, Due Process, and the Right to Legal Representation.

 

Please, anyone correct me if I'm off-base or not clear abut this.

 

Thank You