Federal Court Permanently Vacates Injunction Against NDAA “Indefinite Detention”

The Second Circuit has permanently vacated the injunction issued by the District Court against NDAA 2012 indefinite detention powers.   The case has been remanded to District Court Judge Kathryn Forrest. who originally issued the injunction.

In layman’s terms, Forrest put a stop to indefinite detention, and the Second Circuit overturned that.  It also permanently prohibited Forrest from attempting to do so again, ordering her to proceed with the case consistent with their opinion.

NDAA “indefinite detention” powers are alive and well.

The opinion appears to be based only on lack of standing — based on the Clapper case decided by the Supreme Court:

“In sum, Hedges and O’Brien do not have Article III standing to challenge the statute because Section 1021 simply says nothing about the government’s authority to detain citizens.  While Section 1021 does have meaningful effect regarding the authority to detain individuals who are not citizens or lawful resident aliens and are apprehended abroad, Jonsdottir and Wargalla have not established standing on this record. We VACATE the permanent injunction and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”  P. 60

The Tenth Amendment Center, along with a broad coalition of organizations and individuals, filed an amicus brief on behalf of the defendants.  It was cited at p. 4 and note 3 in the District Court’s opinion:

As one group of amici has noted, “[r]arely has a short statute been subject to more radically different interpretations than Section 1021.”

The only other reference to an amicus brief was at p. 40, in note 137 — Center for National Security Studies.

REVIEWING THE “LAW” IN QUESTION

Details

Breakdown in Americans’ Respect for the Rule of Law?

Some commentators and compilers have sensed what they believe is a weakening of the rule of law in the United States.  I’ve documented an example in one state.

Conduct surrounding the George Zimmerman case provides additional cause for concern, including prejudicial comments by President Obama and rioting subsequent to acquittal.

To his credit, President Obama did express support for the verdict once it came in, although he inappropriately coupled it with promotion of his political agenda.

Adherence to the rule of law is critical to survival of a free society. This, in turn, requires adherence to five basic standards:

Details

Muscotah, Kansas Passes Ordinance to Nullify Federal Gun Control

A second small city in Kansas has stepped up to add another level of defense in the battle to protect the right to keep and bear arms in the Sunflower State.

On July 8, the city of Muscotah, Kan., adopted an ordinance prohibiting any agency or person in the employ of the city from enforcing, providing material support for, or participating in any way in the enforcement of any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of federal government regarding personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition with the city limits. The city modeled its ordinance off one passed earlier this year in Herndon. This was not simply a resolution declaring support for the right to keep and bear arms, but a legally binding ordinance, barring any cooperation with federal agents trying to enforce acts violating the Second Amendment.

Muscotah became the third local government in Kansas to approve a legally binding act protecting the right to keep and bear arms, joining Herndon and Sedgwick County. These local actions add an additional row of teeth to the state law passed during the most recent legislative session.

Kansas was admitted to statehood in 1861, affirming its commitment to the Second Amendment by adopting Section 4 of the State Bill of rights. It provides for the right to keep and bear arms, for the defense of self, family, home and state. With that right under assault by an overzealous and overreaching federal government, state officials moved in to interpose. On April 16, Gov. Brownback signed “The Second Amendment Protection Act” into law. The passage and signing of the Second Amendment Protection Act represented a huge step in protecting the right to keep and bear arms in Kansas, but local support will play a vital role in the ultimate success of the new Kansas law.

Details

Abortion: A State Issue, a National Nightmare

News broke recently that Florida Senator Marco Rubio plans to sponsor a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks.  With Rubio’s reputation recently taking a hit in conservative circles, a cynic might be excused for considering this a political move instead of a principled stand.  Principled or not, there are two questions that Rubio has apparently not considered: is it rational to argue this issue at the national level and is such a bill constitutional.

To answer if it is rational, let’s run through a quick hypothetical scenario.  Let’s say you’re walking down your street and come upon one of your neighbors lying dead in his driveway with a knife sticking out of his back.  As your neighbors crowd around the scene, you see someone dialing their phone.  Who do you think this person is calling?

Maybe they’re calling the President of the United States.  After all, many murders happen across the country every day, clearly making this a national issue that demands the president’s attention.  Or, if not the president, maybe they’ve dialed the offices of federal senators and representatives to let them know about the murder.  When it’s time to prosecute the assailant, where does the trial take place?  Well, an issue as important and widespread as murder certainly demands the attention of the Supreme Court.

Preposterous, right?  Of course a local crime commands a local response.  It would be irrational to use national machinery to address a local or state issue like a violent crime of one individual towards another.

Details

An Anniversary worth Remembering

On July 14, 1798, the Sedition Act became law. Jefferson and Madison responded with the heroic Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, calling for nullification.

I’ve given many talks on nullification, and written a book on it. But this is my favorite one. The last 15 minutes in particular.

Some resources I put together on nullification here:
http://www.libertyclassroom.com/nullification/

Details

NSA Seizures: Papers, Effects, and the Constitution

Randy Barnett has an interesting op ed in the Wall Street Journal arguing that the NSA’s seizure of voluminous data on U.S. citizens was unconstitutional and that the approval of the seizure by the secret FISA court was also unconstitutional.

Randy makes several important points:

1. “By banning unreasonable “seizures” of a person’s “papers,” the Fourth Amendment clearly protects what we today call ‘informational privacy.’”

2. The FISA Court’s approval of the “blanket seizure of data on every American” represents “indiscriminate data seizures” that “are the epitome of ‘unreasonable,’ akin to the ‘general warrants’ issued by the Crown to authorize searches of Colonial Americans.”

3. The program’s approval by the FISA Court violates due process, because “secret judicial proceedings adjudicating the rights of private parties, without any ability to participate or even read the legal opinions of the judges, is the antithesis of the due process of law.”

These are powerful arguments and the entire essay is well worth reading.  I am not entirely sure if Randy is using an originalist methodology here.  If he is, here are my thoughts regarding each of his three points.

Details

Action Alert: Nullify Federal Gun ‘Laws’ Locally in the state of Maine

Unlike most New England states, Maine has relatively relaxed state gun laws. Mainers value their right to keep and bear arms and their elected representatives reflect those values. This year, the Senate voted down two anti-gun bills. Even the governor has professed that he will never sign any anti-gun legislation.

While the state does show some respect to the right to keep and bear arms, there’s much more that needs to be done.  The federal government violates the 2nd Amendment daily, and action should be taken on the local level to help protect it.

Starting today, and all the way through the rest of the year, local governments around the state need to be pressed to take action – passing legislation in support of the right to keep and bear arms locally.  And at the same time, calling on the state legislature to do the same.  When the state is blanketed with local communities willing to nullify violations of the Second Amendment, the state legislature will be on notice.  Do your job, or else.

It’s going to take work to ensure that this is how things play out.  Here’s what you can start doing right now.

1.  Contact your local legislators – County, City, Town - and urge them to introduce an ordinance in support of the Second Amendment.

local ordinance here: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/legislation/2nd-amendment-preservation-act/

2.  Become a local leader.   If you’re dedicated to the right and keep and bear arms, 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. 

Details

Nullification Is The Answer!

via NullifyNow.com

Plain and simple, Washington D.C. is never going to fix Washington D.C.

Not today.

Not next week.

Not even after November 2014.

If you’re going to depend on a political campaign to get (R)’s or (D)’s elected to fix this problem, then you’re destined to be disappointed – and enslaved. The simple fact is that everyone in Washington, Republican and Democrat alike, now believes that they work for a benign, but totalitarian government. They are determined to use their power “for good,” as they define it, but they’re not about to give up their power under any circumstances.

Hell, it took the House an entire year just to bring contempt charges against Attorney General Holder for his stonewalling in “Operation Fast and Furious”. And we know that the Senate will do nothing, even with all of the new revelations concerning the IRS, NSA wiretapping, Benghazi and on and on. It’s all a masquerade. Do we really want to count on these people to protect our Liberty? The idea of a limited government with enumerated powers is not even on their radar.

We burned two entire years waiting for the Supreme Court to save us from Obamacare only to have them betray our trust. How long will we wait for Congress to betray us this time around?

Details

Stop Following the DC Playbook!

via NullifyNow.com

What do we do when the federal government exercises powers it does not rightly possess, or when it violates basic rights protected by the Constitution?

Most Americans have been trained to turn to Washington D.C., pinning their hopes on the next election, or on a favorable Supreme Court ruling to check federal power. But when you really think about it, this fails the logic test. We are asking the federal government to interpret and limit its own power! This is kind of like letting a Duke University player referee a game between the Blue Devils and the Tar Heels. Probably wouldn’t turn out too well for the boys in Carolina Blue!

The founders of the United States fought a bloody war to free themselves from a king who believed he had absolute authority to dictate anything he pleased. It seems more than a little unlikely that these same men would create a new system in the image of the old. In fact, they adamantly opposed it. Therefore, some mechanism must exist to stop the federal government from grabbing power it was not intended to have.

Ink on paper cannot not enforce itself.

The states hold that enforcement power.

Details