PHOENIX (March 27, 2012) – In a surprising move, the Arizona House Rules Committee killed a bill that would help protect citizens of the Grand Canyon State from federal kidnapping. Only immediate action by Arizona residents can resurrect this crucial piece of legislation. The committee voted 5-4 to block passage of SB1182, which would “prohibit…Details
Some people – including the former law instructor who now serves as President of the United States – believe that it is impossible to reconstruct the Constitution’s original meaning. As this book demonstrates, that view is substantially incorrect.
The Original Constitution fills a void that has existed for a long time—the need for a clear, complete, easy-to-read guide to what our Constitution really means.Details
New Arrivals to Legislative Tracking
These Tenth Amendment related items are currently under consideration in the Pennsylvania Legislature and are appearing for the first time in our legislative updates:
- HB1622 – An Act providing for Pennsylvania-manufactured incandescent light bulbs. – Representative GABLER – Referred to COMMERCE, July 18, 2011 [House].
- HR436 – A Resolution designating October 10, 2011, as “Tenth Amendment Day” in Pennsylvania. – Representative CREIGHTON – Adopted, Oct. 5, 2011 (200-0) [House].
- HR319 – A Resolution memorializing Congress to repeal the provisions of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which creates Federal energy efficiency standards for lighting. – Representative GABLER – Referred to ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY, July 18, 2011 [House] .
- HR369 – A Resolution memorializing the Congress of the United States to address concerns raised by recent regulations promulgated by the Federal Highway Administration concerning road and street signs. – Representative LAWRENCE – Referred to TRANSPORTATION, Aug. 10, 2011 [House].
Legislative items which have already been reported and have changed from our last update include:Details
Nearly two months later, HB 2759 remains bottled up in committee.
Five Washington state representatives cosponsor the legislation, which condemns the unlawful detention of United States citizens and lawful resident aliens under the National Defense Authorization Act, and forbids “any state employee, member of the Washington National Guard or any agent of a corporation doing business with the state” to cooperate in the federal detainment or investigation of a U.S. citizen or resident alien.
HB2759 also prohibits the United States military from conducting within the boundaries of the state of Washington, an investigation or detainment of a United States citizen or lawful resident alien located within the state of Washington, except for a few narrowly prescribed circumstances.
Rep. Matt Shea cosponsors the bill. He said legal analysts found at least 11 violations of the U.S. Constitution and 13 violations of the Washington State Constitution in sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA.Details
EDITOR’S NOTE: Misrepresenting Budgets is Fraud. Unless you’re in Elected Office. Then it Gets you Re-Elected
“A public office is a public trust”—common saying, but do we really believe it?
The American Founders did. Most of them agreed that public officials should be held at least to the standards imposed on private trustees and other fiduciaries—maybe even higher standards, since government officials can do more damage than private fiduciaries. (A fiduciary—from Latin words meaning “confidence” and “faith”— is someone entrusted with the property or affairs of another.) The Founders often referred to public officials as the “trustees,” “agents,” “guardians,” or “servants” of the public. (In those days the legal term “servant” referred to an employee in a job not involving a lot of discretion.)
But in modern America public officials are not held to anywhere near the legal standards imposed on private trustees and other fiduciaries. The corporate corruption some on the Left justifiably complain about pales by comparison to common political behavior.Details
MADISON, Wisc. (March 26, 2012) – The Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments on the constitutionality of the federal health care act in the coming days. Many opponents of the federal government’s sweeping takeover of America’s health care system hang their hat on the SCOTUS overturning the unconstitutional act.
But many observers say the Supremes may well rule the act constitutional.
What then? Do we just accept that the federal government can exercise whatever power it wishes, regardless of constitutional restraints? Do we accept that a branch of the federal government gets the final say on the extent of the power available to the federal government? Or do the states follow James Madison and Thomas Jefferson’s lead and say, “No!” to unconstitutional exercises of power?
On Feb. 21, the Wisconsin Senate narrowly passed Joint Resolution 27.
JUNEAU, Alaska (March 25, 2012) – Alaska Rep. Sharon Cissna (D-Anchorage) knows first-hand the degradation and humiliation TSA groping can cause.
Last year, after having already endured one groping on a previous trip, the breast cancer survivor opted to drive from Seattle to Juneau rather than undergo a pat-down when a scanner flagged her surgical scars as an “irregularity.”
“For nearly fifty years I’ve fought for the rights of assault victims, population in which my wonderful Alaska sadly ranks number one, both for men and women who have been abused. The very last thing an assault victim or molested person can deal with is yet more trauma and the groping of strangers, the hands of government ‘safety’ policy. For these people, as well as myself, I refused to submit,” she wrote, chronicling her experience on her blog.
As a state lawmaker, Cissna decided she needed to do something to protect the people she represents from similar groping and peeking. On Jan. 17, she introduced HB 262 in the Alaska House. If passed, the act would make it a class A misdemeanor for any agent to require a person seeking access to a public building or transportation facility to submit to touching of a sexual nature, or screening that reveals any body part not normally visible to the public.Details
Michael Boldin and Nick Hankoff give updates on NDAA resistance in states around the country, share news on events in Missouri and Philly – and more.
Yesterday, the Tenth Amendment Center co-hosted a media conference call to update reporters on state and local resistance to the NDAA. One of the speakers, Green Party member, Progressive – Fairfax, CA town councilor – Larry Bragman – might have made the best statement possible on how to deal with the NDAA
“I think anybody who takes the oath of office in this country as an elected official has got to do what they can do to reverse, oppose and resist this bill, and that’s what we’re doing in Fairfax.”
Joining the show as a guest to talk about that media call – Blake Filippi, of the Rhode Island Liberty Coalition, and spokesman for the TAC during the event.
When asked about the states responses to the Fugitive Slave Acts, he mentioned, “The State of Rhode Island passed the personal liberty law, and essentially nullified the Fugitive Slave Act. It forbade judges recognizing claims, it extended trial by jury, and provided habeas corpus to the slaves.” He continued, “Massachusetts went so far that federal officials who took slaves through the Fugitive Slave Act called it kidnapping. ”
During this brief lull in activity, the Tenth Amendment movement has a great opportunity to help keep this important bill in the forefront of the minds of Kansas leadership. To do that, we ask that you take a moment to contact them utilizing the below information in the “Take Action” section, and politely explain why you are serious about the protection of our Constitutional rights. Remember – If the Firearm Freedom Act should pass in Kansas, it will undoubtedly encourage other states in upholding the second amendment’s right to keep and bear arms.
As HB2421 reads, “The tenth amendment to the constitution of the United States guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Kansas certain powers as they were understood at the time that Kansas was admitted to statehood in 1861. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Kansas and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Kansas in 1859 and the United States in 1861.”Details
Recent presidents have so mutilated the clear language of the Constitution as to the authority to make war that congressional pushback, even from the weak Congress we now have, was inevitable. That pushback came in a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing when Joint Chief of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey inferred that the authority that he depended upon was not from Congress, as required in the U. S. Constitution, but from unelected UN or NATO authorities.
Senator Jeff Sessions, Chairman of the Committee, then interviewed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and was given the same response. Disbelieving what he heard, Sessions repeatedly inquired in different ways only to be given the same answer. (See YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zNwOeyuG84) Even the President’s voice did not appear to be as important as that of the UN or NATO.
Constitutional clarity is so strong with respect to Congress alone having sole power of war that it is hard to imagine that such statements are due to gross ignorance alone. This is one of the most critical moments in U. S. History with respect to liberty. If the Executive Branch of government can effectively remove the power to initiate war from Congress, giving it to itself, and then to some international coalition such as the U. N. or NATO, we essentially lose our sovereignty and our armies used as the policemen of the world.
Would not the recipient of such power, the United Nations, not then become the dreaded world government? Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution, preserving Americas right to fight whomever, would be effectively destroyed.Details