Leftists often attack nullification.
Sometimes, it seems that MSNBC makes a living at it. However, there is some hope that many who lean left are actually starting to embrace the concept, although still loath to use the word. For example, the ACLU has created a toolkit for local and state resolutions against the NDAA.
So, could that venerable far-left organization known as ThinkProgress ever climb aboard the nullification train? Not likely, eh?
In their article, Berkley to Federal Prosecutors: Don’t Mess With Our Medical Marijuana Program, they reported positively on Berkley’s attempts to stop the feds from future seizures of property belonging to the cities’ medical marijuana dispensaries.
“The city is arguing that the federal government is improperly interfering with the city’s own financial and regulatory interests, as well as its residents’ medical interests.”
The article also lists Oakland as another California city taking similar measures. Of course, they don’t use the “n” word: nullification.
Some of the comments left by readers of ThinkProgress add an interesting railroad spike to this story – hardly a crowd that can be called ultra right-winged nutjobs.
Jimmy Burnside said, “We need to start arresting these federal agents under state law. Maybe then they will see the hypocrisy.”
Also, a ThinkProgress “Top Commenter”, Joan Moore wrote:
It is inconceivable that the Feds can find any legitimate reason or defense against such the case brought by the City of Berkeley. There only course is more BS from the Feds. Maybe the states need to mobilize their own militias to defend the laws and rights of the people of their respective states. Non violent, hopefully, but it is time to end this insanity at the Federal level.
Sadly, ThinkProgress does run off the rails at one point. The writer correctly reports that states can refuse to aid the federal government, but later falsely asserts that the federal government has the authority to ban marijuana.
The folks at ThinkProgress should consider this: it took a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol. Later, Americans realized their error and repealed that amendment. If an amendment was necessary to ban alcohol, why suddenly isn’t one needed for marijuana? The answer is simple – the federal government doesn’t have said authority. This is a state, not a federal issue.
Many people often fail to understand that this is true of most issues -from those that appeal to the left like marijuana to conservative issues like guns. The states have this authority to regulate such things, not the federal government. The feds have some authority to regulate interstate but not intrastate commerce. (trade)
The Tenth Amendment Center has made this argument many times: it is about sticking to the Constitution- every issue, every time, no exceptions, no excuses.
Perhaps ThinkProgress is starting to come to this realization. We’d love to welcome them to the nullification train.
Latest posts by John Lambert (see all)
- Brion McClanahan on the Original Meaning and Purpose of the 2nd Amendment - July 7, 2016
- We Are All Jeffersonians Now - June 6, 2016
- What is Originalism? - May 31, 2016