by Michael Cannon, CATO Institute Over at Bloomberg, National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru writes about the Obama administration’s disregard for the rule of law, including the IRS’s $800 billion power grab: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the sweeping health-care law that Obama signed in 2010, asks state governments to set up health exchanges, and authorizes the federal government to…Details
by Ron Paul
In addition to shredding civil liberties, launching a utopian global war for democracy, and going on a spending spree that would make LBJ blush, the so-called “conservative” Bush administration dramatically increased federal control over education via the “No Child Left Behind” act. During my time in Congress I heard nothing but complaints about this law from teachers, administrators, and, most importantly, students and parents. Most of the complaints concerned No Child Left Behind’s testing requirements, which encouraged educators to “teach to the test.”
Sadly, but not surprisingly, instead of improving education by repealing No Child Left Behind’s testing and other mandates, the Obama administration is increasing national control over schools via the “Common Core” initiative. Common Core is a new curriculum developed by a panel of so-called education experts. The administration is trying to turn Common Core into a national curriculum by offering states increased federal education funding if they impose Common Core’s curriculum on their public schools. This is yet another example of the government using money stolen from the people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates.
Critics of Common Core say it “dumbs down” education by replacing traditional English literature with “informational texts”. So students will read such inspiring materials as studies by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, the EPA’s “Recommended Levels of Insulation,” and “Invasive Plant Inventory” by California’s Invasive Plant Council. It is doubtful that reading federal reports will teach students the habits of critical thinking and skepticism of government that the Founders considered essential to maintaining a free republic.Details
MADISON, Wisc. – Wisconsin joined the growing number of states considering restrictions on drone use last week.
No Wisconsin law enforcement agency may use a drone to gather evidence or other information in a criminal investigation without first obtaining a search warrant under s. 968.12. This subsection does not apply to the use of a drone to assist in an active search and rescue operation, to locate an escaped prisoner, or if a law enforcement officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the use of a drone is necessary to prevent imminent danger to an individual or to prevent imminent destruction of evidence.
The legislation also bans weaponized drones completely and applies criminal penalties for violations of the law.
A person who sells, possesses, or uses a weaponized drone is guilty of a Class H felony, and may be fined up to $10,000, imprisoned for up to six years, or both. The bill prohibits a person, except a law enforcement officer who has a search warrant or is acting for a permissible emergency purpose, from using a drone that is equipped with video or audio recording equipment to photograph, record, or otherwise observe another individual in a place where the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Anyone who does so is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor, and may be fined up to $10,000, imprisoned for up to nine months, or both.
Unlike many drone bills under consideration or passed by state legislatures, the Wisconsin bill does not provide an exception for Department of Homeland Security defined terror threats.
While the legislation only limits drone use by state and local government, it will seriously impact federal plans. At this stage in the ‘drone game,’ the feds are working hard behind the scenes to get states to operate the drones for them.Details
Last week, the California Liberty Preservation Act, AB351, was passed unanimously by the Assembly Appropriations Committee and sent to the full State Assembly for a vote.
The bill would play a big part in nullifying the “indefinite detention” provisions of both the NDAA and the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF).
It took significant grassroots pressure from across the political spectrum to make legislators know that this bill was important to the public. The following is a letter that was sent in support by Dani Rascon, from the Los Angeles Republican Party Central Committee and Oath Keepers – LA Chapter.Details
North Carolina has one of the toughest legislatures in the U.S. to pass bills through. Most legislation never makes it out of committee. Committees like the Judiciary Committee have up to five vice chairs and up to 40 members. This makes it even harder for concerned citizens to convince representatives to vote a certain way.
But don’t despair! Options to protect the right to keep and bear arms in North Carolina remain open. You can build grassroots groups to block violations of the Second Amendment at the local level, working through county commissions and town councils.
Of course, local governments won’t act without citizen input and grassroots pressure. The good news is a few dedicated individuals can make a difference at the local level.
That’s where you can step up to the plate.
Form grassroots local nullification groups. BDetails
The incorporation doctrine makes the provisions of the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution applicable the states.
It wasn’t until 1925, some 57 years after ratification of the 14th, that the Supreme Court mystically found that the amendment bound the states to the Bill of Rights. Since then, America has increasingly become a nation governed by judiciary.
Why is incorporation bad? Can’t the Federal government do things so much better than the states? Vice President Biden believes so. When he was a Senator, he claimed: “…the reason the federal government got into 90 percent of the business it got into is that the state[s]…did not do the job.”
I disagree and say that it is strictly a power grab by the federal government via the courts.
I’m not going to delve into the Constitutionality of incorporation (more on that HERE), but instead focus on how individual liberty is lost when ultimate control is in Washington.
We perhaps see this most clearly in the issue of freedom of religion. The First Amendment clearly says “Congress shall make no law …” Congress obviously does not encompass the states. By allowing this amendment to apply to them, the federal government morphs into a one size fits all policy-maker destroying religious prerogative in the states.Details
Much of my scholarly research is designed to set the historical record straight—essentially myth-busting.
For reasons I’ll explain another time, most legal writers are terrible historians. They tend to cherry-pick history to promote a case, and when there aren’t enough historical facts, they sometimes make them up.
My efforts to correct the record are best known in the realm of constitutional law, but my first big project of the kind was actually about condominiums.
In the 1960s, ‘70s, and ‘80s, legal writers were uncritically repeating the story that the ancient Romans invented condominiums, or at least used them widely. This story made no sense at all: Ancient writers don’t mention condominiums, and Roman law actually prohibited schemes whereby one person owned airspace above another person. (The word “condominium,” meaning “co-ownership,” is Latin, but it is of relatively modern, not Roman, coinage.)Details
In less than two weeks, Missouri could join Kansas in enacting a state law refusing to enforce federal gun control measures.
On May 22, the Second Amendment Preservation Act (HB 436) was sent to Governor Jay Nixon. As of this writing, Nixon, a Democrat, has not indicated whether he plans to veto or sign the bill.
Earlier this month, both houses of the Republican-controlled state legislature passed the bill by an overwhelming majority.
When asked about Governor Nixon’s intention, a source inside his office told The New American that in an effort to avoid multiplying the several scandals already plaguing his administration, Nixon would likely let the bill sit on his desk without signing or vetoing it, thus allowing the measure to become law without his participation.
Every bill which shall have passed the house of representatives and the senate shall be presented to and considered by the governor, and, within fifteen days after presentment, he shall return such bill to the house in which it originated endorsed with his approval or accompanied by his objections. If the bill be approved by the governor it shall become a law. When the general assembly adjourns, or recesses for a period of thirty days or more, the governor shall return within forty-five days any bill to the office of the secretary of state with his approval or reasons for disapproval. If any bill shall not be returned by the governor within the time limits prescribed by this section it shall become law in like manner as if the governor had signed it.
Therefore, the Missouri gun control nullification bill could become law on July 6 (45 days from its May 22 transmittal date) without the governor’s signature.
Should he decide to sign the bill, however, Governor Nixon would join Governor Sam Brownback of Kansas, who recently enacted a similar measure passed with overwhelming support by the Kansas state legislature.
While there are similarities between the Kansas and Missouri measures, the text of the Missouri bill goes much farther in its bold opposition to attempts by the federal government to infringe on the right of Missourians to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.Details
Illinois SB1587, the Freedom from Drone Surveillance Act, was referred to the Rules Committee last month, but still has not been brought up for a vote. This bill would prohibit warrantless drone surveillance under most circumstances. Passage would end the possibility of most drone use in Illinois. This is a BIG step forward for the privacy.
SB1587 has been stalled for about a month. With the end of the session fast approaching, the bill may die without your vigilance.
1. Contact the House Chair on Rules. Politely ask her to schedule a hearing and vote YES on SB1587
Barbara Currie (217) 782-8121
2. Contact all the other members of the Rules Committee. Strongly, but respectfully, urge each of them to vote YES on SB1587.
Timothy Schmitz (217) 782-5457
Lou Lang (217) 782-1252
David Leitch (217) 782-8108
Frank Mautino (217) 782-0140
Don’t look now, but nullification is about to spread to the courtroom. NBC 7 in San Diego reported this week that the city’s mayor, Bob Filner, has called for jurors to refuse to convict the operators of licensed marijuana dispensaries who have been arrested under anti-drug laws by the federal government. State and local laws in San Diego permit the sale and use of marijuana for medicinal purposes.
San Diego Mayor Bob Filner has injected himself into a federal criminal case against the operator of a medical marijuana dispensary, intensifying his standoff with federal prosecutors on cannabis enforcement issues.
Filner’s urging jurors who’ll be chosen for the trial to reject federal law in favor of state statutes under a centuries-old legal concept known as “jury nullification”– whereby jurors can refuse to convict people under laws they believe should not be applied.
“It’s time, like with Prohibition, to step back and say this was a stupid thing to do,” Filner said outside the courthouse. “Let’s step back, and juries ought to take the lead and say that to the federal government…and if the federal government isn’t listening to the mayor, maybe they’ll listen to the jury.”
Against the articulated wishes of the community, the federal government continues to raid these dispensaries and arrest the people who operate them, actions that clearly violate both the Constitution and the sovereignty of the state and local governments. Filner in decrying this federal usurpation stated, “This is way overdoing it when local laws, state laws allow compassionate use of medical marijuana.”Details