This episode is made possible in part by the new Nullification Movie. Now available for order at tenthamendmentcenter.com/movie
From New Jersey, Benjamin Mankowski, Sr reports that the state are some small sparks of hope when it comes to nullification of Obamacare. Governor Christie vetoed the bill that would have implemented the health insurance exchanges, and there is hope that he will do so again.
Assemblywoman Alison Littel-McHose introduced legislation to nullify the Affordable Care Act, and the bill will be up for consideration in the 2013 legislative session. In other states, grassroots groups are forming to pressure state legislators to introduce the same. Activists are building networks in Texas, Ohio, Idaho and elsewhere, and we’ll be reporting on their progress as news comes in.
In the Chicago Tribune, Steve Chapman wrote an article that seems to not only get, but support, the basic principles of nullification. He writes, On Nov. 6, residents of Colorado, Oregon and Washington will vote on ballot measures to allow the regulated production, sale, and use of pot.
In Colorado, which already has a large network of medical marijuana dispensaries, familiarity has bred acceptance. One of the most noteworthy headlines of 2011 came on a news release from Public Policy Polling: “Colorado favors gay marriage, marijuana use, loves Tebow.” Affection for the Denver quarterback may have ebbed since he went to the New York Jets, but the Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol Act of 2012 is leading in the polls.
Weed would remain illegal under federal law, but good luck to the feds trying to enforce that ban if a state abandons it. As the Drug Policy Alliance notes, medical marijuana has gotten established over the objections of Washington.
Speaking of pot, Paul Armentano report on the NORML blog that Connecticut’s medical marijuana law just went into effect this month. The state is now the 17th to flat-out defy the feds on this issue.
And that really is the bottom line. When enough people say no to Washington DC, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, it becomes increasingly difficult for the Feds to enforce their unconstitutional laws, regulations and mandates.
Dennis Marburger reports that the NDAA nullification effort is moving forward in Michigan. Ray Kirkus led a contingent to press the Berrien County commissioners to introduce the Liberty Preservation Act last week. And while Dennis noted that the reception was “less than ideal,” a growing grassroots coalition is getting behind the effort. This morning in Oakland County, the General Government Committee will hear from residents in support of Jim Runestad’s Liberty Preservation Resolution. And, residents and patriot activists in additional counties and municipalities all around Michigan are making moves to join the effort – we expect to see a number of counties considering similar legislation in the near future..
According to a report by Brian Koenig in the New American magazine, Almost 2,400 Americans who collected unemployment benefits in 2009 resided in households with annual incomes of at least $1 million. This information came fromo a recent report compiled by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). The 10-page report was published after more than a million people exhausted their unemployment benefits during the second quarter of 2012, when well over 4.5 million people filed for jobless claims.
According to the CRS report, the Labor Department requires states to disperse unemployment payments to eligible recipients regardless of their reported income because it’s a variable that does not impact the “fact or cause of unemployment.” The 2,362 Americans with $1 million-plus income represent 0.02 percent of the 11.3 million tax filers who received unemployment benefits in 2009. Meanwhile, nearly a million households earning more than $100,000 also reported unemployment insurance income in that year.
From an article by Rob Natelson, the Supreme Court has a chance to end state university discrimination. By granting certiorari (sir sheer or air ee) in Fisher v. University of Texas, the Supreme Court has a chance to correct one of the most obnoxious aspects of modern jurisprudence. Meaning…permission given to state universities—in Grutter v. Bollinger—to use public resources to play racial and ethnic politics.
University “diversity” policies vary in their details. But in their now-prevalent form, they are carefully gerrymandered to skew benefits toward particular groups with left-of-center voting patterns and away from groups without such patterns.
According to Natelson, there is a decent argument for allowing private educational institutions some ethnic flexibility in admissions so long as they don’t violate the civil rights laws. But the state universities involved in such practices are not private: they are state agencies that are all too willing to take your tax dollars. As such, they are bound by the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says that “No State shall . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The history of the Equal Protection Clause shows that its core purpose was to end state racial discrimination. In the Fisher case, the Supreme Court should announce that if universities want to play racial politics then, within the limits of the Civil Rights Laws, they may do so—as private institutions. But as long as they remain state entities, the Constitution requires them to treat all ethnic groups alike.
In closing today, Liberty Fest 3 hits New York City this coming weekend. Saturday, October 13th from 2-10pm. Speakers include Tom Woods, Adam Kokesh, John Bush – and many others, including yours truly. Get all the details and tickets at lfnyc.com
10 for 10: Tenther News is a weekly video report on the top 10th Amendment news around the country. Get 10 minutes (or so) on the 10th, from the Tenth Amendment Center. Live at 10:10 AM (Pacific Time) every Monday at www.youtube.com/tenthamendmentcenter.
If you enjoyed this post:
Click Here to Get the Free Tenth Amendment Center Newsletter,