Florida Governor Signs Anti-Drone Bill into Law

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (April 25, 2013) – A bill nullifying warrantless drone spying was signed into law by Florida Governor Rick Scott today. The bill passed the House 117-0 and the Senate 39-0.

SB92 prohibits any law enforcement agency from using unmanned drones to gather evidence or other information without a warrant.  It reads, in part:  “A law enforcement agency may not use a drone to gather evidence or other information.”

The bill opens the door for any person whose privacy is violated by a drone to take civil action and would also make any evidence gathered in violation of the act inadmissible in court.

Asked what he liked about the bill Thursday, Scott had a simple response. “I like privacy,” he said.

Details

South Carolina House Gives Approval to Obamacare Nullification Bill

A bill that would nullify the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in South Carolina through noncompliance passed a 2nd reading in the state house today. The Republican controlled House approved H3101 by a 65-34 vote along partisan lines.  The bill reads, in part:

(3) It is the stated policy of the South Carolina general assembly that provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 grossly exceeds the powers delegated to the federal government in the Constitution.

(4) The provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 which exceed the limited powers granted to Congress pursuant to the Constitution, cannot and should not be considered the supreme law of the land.

(5,) The General Assembly of South Carolina has the absolute and sovereign authority to interpose and refuse to enforce the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 that exceed the authority of the Congress.

The bill also prohibits state cooperation with implementation  of the unconstitutional federal act within the state.

(A) No agency of the State, officer or employee of this State, acting on behalf of the state, may engage in an activity that aids any agency in the enforcement of those provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 and any subsequent federal act that amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 that exceed the authority of the United States Constitution.

(B) The General Assembly…is empowered to take all necessary actions to ensure that the provisions of subsection (A) of this code section are adhered to by all agencies, departments and political subdivisions of the State.

Passage of H3101 into law would require the state to refuse the creation of an exchange, medicaid expansion, would empower them to strip licenses from insurance companies that accept monies from the Feds on Obamacare and much more.  This covers a big portion of the steps needed to fully nullify Obamacare.  No such bill – nothing even close – has been passed by any state in modern American history AFTER the Supreme Court gave their opinion on the constitutionality of a federal act.

Details

Missouri 2nd Amendment Preservation Act One Step Away from the Governor’s Desk

“The Second Amendment Preservation Act” successfully made its way through a Missouri State Senate Committee on Wednesday, bringing the state ever closer to protecting the natural rights of their citizens.

HB 436 was passed by a Senate Committee on a 4-1 vote. The bill was already passed by a strong veto-proof majority in the State House. It now awaits a full vote in the State Senate before it is fully passed and sent to the governor.

UPDATED 04-26 We’ve been informed that the Senate committee removed an unrelated amendment that the house inserted, so after passing the full senate it will first go back to the House for concurrence, then to the governor’s desk.

If passed into law, HB436 would nullify virtually every federal gun control measure on the books – or planned for the future.   It reads, in part:

All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

(2) Such federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations include, but are not limited to:
(a) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1934;
(b) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968;
(c) Any tax, levy, fee, or stamp imposed on firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition not common to all other goods and services which could have a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;
(d) Any registering or tracking of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which could have a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;
(e) Any registering or tracking of the owners of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which could have a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;
(f) Any act forbidding the possession, ownership, or use or transfer of any type of firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition by law-abiding citizens; and
(g) Any act ordering the confiscation of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition from law-abiding citizens.

The bill also does a service of providing the State Legislature and the public-at-large with a history lesson that is particularly appreciated by Tenthers, saying, “The limitation of the federal government’s power is affirmed under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people of the several states to the federal government, and all power not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States is reserved to the states respectively, or to the people themselves.”

Details

California Anti-Drone Bill Advances To Assembly Floor

California’s state legislature, like many around the nation, is grappling with the issue of privacy in the face of the growing demand by law enforcement to use drones to combat criminal activity.

AB 1327  introduced by Jeff Gorell (R-Camarillo) would require law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant before using an unmanned aerial system to collect evidence relating to criminal activity.

The bill was approved by the state Assembly’s Public Safety Committee on Tuesday.

Among other safeguards, the bill  would require law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant based on probable cause before using a drone to collect evidence. Exceptions would include emergencies such as a hostage crisis, fire, hot pursuit of a suspected criminal or search-and-rescue operation over land or water. It would allow cities and counties to enact more restrictive policies if they choose to do so.

Gorell described the bill as “pretty restrictive.”

AB1327 would also require that public agencies permanently destroy all data and images collected by an unmanned aerial device within 10 days unless required as evidence of a crime or as part of a court order. A person who is subject to surveillance without consent may seek and obtain an injunction prohibiting the use of images, footage, or data related to the person that was obtained through the surveillance, and would provide for the awarding of liquidated damages of five thousand dollars ($5,000) for each day of surveillance and any actual damages in excess of that amount.

Unmanned systems are most commonly known for their use by the military and this  is not lost on Gorell. He served as a naval targeting officer in Afghanistan.

Details

Proof is in the Pot

Nullification works!

As Tenth Amendment Center founder and executive director Michael Boldin often says on Tenther Radio, the feds always need state and local law enforcement. Every drug raid ends with a DEA press release thanking state or local law enforcement for its cooperation.

The feds simply don’t have the resources or manpower to enforce all of their acts.

Judge Napolitano states, “State non-compliance makes federal enforcement almost nearly impossible.”

But don’t believe nullification works just because Michael Boldin says so! Don’t buy into it just because Judge Napolitano agrees.

The DEA says so too!

The Huffington Post reports that the DEA is trying desperately to justify its budget. How can they do their job if states won’t enforce their federal “laws?” Who will destroy the weed?

In California, several nullification bills addressing medical marijuana were signed into law. In 1996, Proposition 215, or the Compassionate Use Act, was enacted after a 56 percent state-wide vote in favor. This bill  allowed patients with a valid doctor’s recommendation, and the patient’s designated Primary Caregiver’s approval, to possess and cultivate marijuana for personal medical use. Since then, the program has been expanded to protect a growing system of collective and cooperative distribution.

Details