Texas House Bill 149, to nullify NDAA “indefinite detention” failed to pass through the process in the House in time to become law this legislative session. There’s still the possibility that the bill could be added as a rider to another bill that did, but that’s not the only hope for Texans looking to stop the unconstitutional federal act.
HB149 is only one piece of the puzzle to nullify the unconstitutional federal act. The most important step is something you can doing right now – nullify locally!
Government bodies at the local level can step into the fray. Counties and cities must refuse to assist any federal attempts at indefinite detention in their jurisdictions. Starting now, work to get your county, city or town to pass a resolution then a binding ordinance in response to NDAA indefinite detention. Covering the state with local communities saying NO to the unconstitutional federal act will not only render the law “nearly impossible to enforce” as Judge Napolitano has said, it will also provide the heavy pressure needed to ensure that the state legislature will have the courage to do the same in the future.
Here’s what you can start doing right now.
1. Contact your local legislators – County, City, Town - and urge them to introduce model legislation in support of the Liberty Preservation Act.
local ordinance here:
2. Become a local leader. If you’re dedicated to stopping federally sanctioned kidnapping, we’ll provide you with the tools you need to not only act on your own, but to organize and lead others to help support these efforts.
contact us here and let us know – http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/volunteer
3. Get active on Facebook. Follow the Texas Tenth Amendment Center and join the Nullify NDAA group for Texas:
4. Share this information widely. Please pass this along to your friends and family. Also share it with any and all grassroots groups you’re in contact with around the state. Please encourage them to email this information to their members and supporters.
BACKGROUND ARTICLES AND INFORMATION ON NDAA “INDEFINITE DETENTION”
There is absolutely ZERO serious dispute about the fact that the federal government cannot “commandeer” the states to carry out its laws. None. Even the Supreme Court has affirmed this multiple times.
In the 1992 case, New York v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress couldn’t require states to enact specified waste disposal regulations.
In the 1997 case, Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not command state law enforcement authorities to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers.
In the 2012 case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court ruled that a significant expansion of Medicaid was not a valid exercise of Congress’s spending power, as it would coerce states to either accept the expansion or risk losing existing Medicaid funding.
In each of these cases, the Supreme Court made is quite clear that their opinion is that the federal government cannot require the states to act, or even coerce them to act through a threat to lose funding. Their opinion is correct. If the feds pass a law, they can sure try to enforce it if they want. But the states absolutely do NOT have to help them in any way.
Note: while some believe that the 2013 NDAA eliminated indefinite detention, it does not. Dianne Feinstein introduced a very weak amendment to 2013 – and it failed anyway. 2012 indefinite detention provisions remain in tact – and the Obama administration is aggressively defending them in court.
Also, a case about indefinite detention is still being heard in federal court. Last year, Federal Judge Katherine Forrest struck down these indefinite detention powers as unconstitutional. She issued a temporary court order blocking the use of these powers. That order was revoked by the appeals court and indefinite detention powers remain while the case is currently on appeal but not decided.
Additionally, when asked by Judge Forrest if the federal government was using indefinite detention in violation of her temporary order blocking it, Barack Obama’s attorneys refused to confirm, leaving the door open that the Feds were potentially using this power in secret, even in outright defiance of an order from the federal courts.
Because of all this, and more, the state stands on strong ground to reject a federal power which has already been struck down in federal court and is still pending appeal. Whether on a local or a state level, NDAA should be rejected with full confidence.
Latest posts by TAC Daily Updates (see all)
- James Madison on “Parchment Barriers” and the defense of liberty - September 17, 2014
- New Hampshire: A Hotbed for Liberty - September 1, 2014
- James Monroe writes to Thomas Jefferson on State vs Federal Governments - August 27, 2014