To the Governor’s Desk: California Assembly Gives Final Approval to Right to Try Act Rejecting Some FDA Restrictions on Terminally-Ill
JUNEAU, Ala – Today, Alaska Governor Sean Parnell signed HB69, the 2nd Amendment Preservation Act, into law.
The bill nullifies a large swath of unconstitutional federal power over the right to keep and bear arms. It begins with the premise that violations of the 2nd Amendment are not law at all. It reads, in part:
a statute, regulation, rule, or order that has the purpose, intent, or effect of confiscating any firearm, banning any firearm, limiting the size of a magazine for any firearm, imposing any limit on the ammunition that may be purchased for any firearm, or requiring the registration of any firearm or its ammunition infringes on an Alaskan’s right to bear arms in violation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and, therefore, is not made in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States, is not the supreme law of the land, and, consequently, is invalid in this state and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state
It continues, requiring the state to stand down on enforcement of federal laws violating the right to keep and bear arms:
A state or municipal agency may not use or authorize the use of an asset to implement or aid in the implementation of a requirement of
(1) an order of the President of the United States, a federal regulation, or a law enacted by the United States Congress that is applied to
(A) infringe on a person’s right, under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, to keep and bear arms;
This is a VERY effective method to stop the federal government from infringing the right to keep and bear arms within Alaska. It’s a known fact that a vast majority of federal enforcement actions rely on state and local assets in order to have the manpower and resources to carry them out. As Judge Andrew Napolitano has said recently, such widespread noncompliance would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible to enforce” (video here)
The bill also instructs the State Attorney General to defend any citizen who may be charged by the federal government, or its representatives, under such “laws” as may be passed by Washington DC.
Senator Coghill, who worked on the amendment instructing the AG to defend citizens, had this to say in the closing arguments when it passed in the legislature: “we believe in a strong central government, but we don’t believe in an omnipotent central government… Remember, it was the states that made the federal government. The states are now being forgotten by the very central government they put together, by them ignoring the very Constitution that tied us together as states. The tension has arisen and we have to answer that tension. This (bill) does that.”
HB69 is also an expansion on the state’s previously passed Firearms Freedom Act. That bill made state law that federal power under the constitution’s commerce clause did not apply to firearms, parts and accessories manufactured and held within the state, as this was not interstate commerce. The new legislation takes the natural progression and included firearms and accessories that are not just manufactured in the state – but any possessed in the state as well. Read quite clearly, that’s all firearms, parts and accessories in the state except those few which are intended for sale across state lines.
As what some might consider a bonus added to the legislation in the Senate Amendment, the bill also prohibits compliance with NDAA “indefinite detention” AND the Real ID Act of 2005.
The prohibition on use of state assets (above) also includes the following:
1. Any federal act that would “deny a person a right to due process, or a protection of due process, that would otherwise be available to the person under the Constitution of the State of Alaska, or the Constitution of the United States
2. P.L. 109-13, Division B (REAL ID Act of 2005).
LEGISLATION TRACKING
Keep up to date with the status of bills to nullify unconstitutional federal gun control here:
http://tracking.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2ndamendment
Get model legislation for your state or local community to nullify federal gun control here:
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2ndamendmentpreservation
NEXT STEPS
Latest posts by TAC Daily Updates (see all)
- Texas Bullion Depository Closer to Becoming a Reality - May 24, 2016
- Missouri House committee capitulates to feds on REAL ID. Can Still be Stopped. - April 11, 2016
- On REAL ID, DHS Caves Once Again - January 10, 2016
Related posts
This is not “nullification”; rather, it is simply non-cooperation. Nothing has been “nullified”. Moreover, it is only a very partial protection for the citizens of Alaska, as the minions of the General Government can (and will) still enter the State to make their illegal searches, seizures, arrests, and so on. These may decrease in number, but they will continue to be treated as “lawful”, because they will not be interdicted. So this statute cannot even be labeled “interposition”. This is not to say that in some cases it will not prove useful. But it is a stop-gap measure at best. Perhaps, though, it indicates that some State legislators are finally becoming aware of their constitutional responsibilities. Now, if they will focus on the thirteen most important words in the Constitution, something really effective may be accomplished.
Claiming that noncooperation isn’t a part of nullification is just…wrong. While the law may still be on the books in DC, a full state stand-down will make those laws “nearly impossible to enforce” (as Judge Andrew Napolitano said recently). If multiple states do this, it will create roadblocks that the federal government will be “hardly willing to encounter” (as James Madison said)
Now if you don’t want to call this nullification, that’s fine. We do – “any act or set of actions which has as its end result a particular law being rendered null and void or unenforceable.
Also – the assumption that you appear to be making in your comment, Edwin, is that to qualify as nullification an act must do one or both of the following:
a) legally overturn a federal law
b) contain acts of physical interposition against federal agents who attempt to enforce
But yet, this is simply an assumption. A false one, indeed.
The first, a state cannot do.
The second, while it could be part of a nullification effort, is generally a very ineffective way to approach things.
Finally, by your own words, you discount the effect of non-cooperation. I could write tomes as to why this is either ignorant, or short-sighted – or both.
Does that mean that Federal laws barring me from purchasing any automatic firearm made after 1986 or me being required to purchase a tax stamp for any automatic weapon or SBR is not enforced in Alaska now. If so, I’m moving to Alaska. Anyone know of any good IT jobs up there?
He signed it already; Gov. Parnell is strong supporter of our 2nd Amendment rights.