We disagree. And so do definitions at Cambridge University Press – and other major publishers.
They seem to be confusing the definition of the word “nullification” with the definition of the word “obstruction.”
While obstructing federal agents could certainly have the effect of nullifying a federal act, it’s not always the right strategy, and it’s certainly not the only strategy.
Taking other actions – such as refusing to enforce or participate can, as Cambridge says, “cause something to have no value or effect”
And that’s our end goal on all unconstitutional acts.
On the other hand, who cares what you call it if the end result is the same?
Latest posts by Michael Boldin (see all)
- Signed as Law: California Reins in Asset Forfeiture, Takes on Federal Equitable Sharing Program - September 29, 2016
- Tenther Tuesday Episode 4: What they Didn’t Talk About in the Debates. And Protecting the Constitution Locally - September 27, 2016
- The Constitution and the Power to “Declare War” - September 24, 2016