Resolution to Ban Compliance with NDAA “Indefinite Detention” introduced in San Francisco

Though 15 states are currently entertaining condemnations of the NDAA kidnapping provisions, the effort has included city and county governments as well. On Tuesday, February 12 San Francisco became the latest when Board of Supervisors President David Chiu introduced a non-binding resolution instructing local agencies to not comply with federal enforcement of their indefinite detention.

“I thought we had left behind the dark days of World War II,” Chiu told a crowd outside the City Hall before the formal introduction to the Supervisors, alluding to the mass incarceration of Japanese-Americans by President Roosevelt 71 years ago. Indeed, history is repeating itself for three families with victims of that disgraceful era and the resolution includes a clause reminding people of that fact:

WHEREAS, The families of Fred Korematsu, Minoru Yasui, and Gordon Hirabayashi, Japanese Americans incarcerated in World War II, filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Hedges v. Obama, a lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of the NDAA’s detentions provisions, citing that, under the pretense of national security, the NDAA essentially repeats the decisions in the discredited World War IIlegal cases of Korematsu, Yasui, and Hirabaryashi, and allows the government to imprison people without any due process rights for an indefinite time

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors is expected to vote in favor since five out of its 11 members are already co-sponsors. Nadia Kayyali, legal fellow with the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, says, “If this resolution is to pass, San Francisco will be part of a national movement, as the 18th city to pass a resolution opposing the NDAA.” Kayyali is looking forward to the day a Liberty Preservation Act-type bill is introduced in Sacramento.


Will Illinois Finally Nullify the Feds on Marijuana?

Medical marijuana is not a new issue for the Illinois legislature, but past failures to pass such a bill are not discouraging Rep. Louis Lang. The Democratic legislator re-introduced the idea for 2013 in the form of HB-1, known as Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act which is now in the Rules Committee.

Eighteen states already recognize the medicinal use of marijuana, but it remains illegal according to the federal government. This despite the fact that the Constitution delegates no power to the feds to regulate a plant grown within the borders of a state.

“The whole ‘war on drugs’ is blatantly unconstitutional. Doubt me? Then ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol,” Tenth Amendment Center communications director Mike Maharrey said. “Basically, 18 states told the feds to go pound sand. They went ahead and did what their people wanted them to do regarding weed, despite the federal power grab. And that’s how it should work. States should simply tell the feds, ‘No!’ when the DC’vers overstep their constitutional authority. Kudos to all of the states with medical marijuana programs, and kudos to bold lawmakers like the folks in Illinois for attempting to stand up to the feds. It’s great to see Democrats hopping on the nullification bandwagon.”


Maryland Liberty Preservation Act scheduled for a hearing

Without a peep, back on December 31, 2011 President Obama and Congress codified into “law” the authority to kidnap anyone anywhere and hold them under cloak of war for life. This year, the rising chorus of states against those “indefinite detention” powers outlined in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) provides an alternate course for America to take – not to comply with unconstitutional federal actions.

Maryland is the latest of 15 states in 2013 to consider such a response, introduced as HB 558 the Liberty Preservation Act of 2013. A hearing is scheduled for Thursday, February 21 at 1pm. The bill, authored by Delegate Don Dwyer, was first read to the Health and Government Operations Committee two weeks ago. HB 558 reads in part (PDF):


This Liberty Preservation Act of 2013 has attracted 10 co-authors, all Republicans. To pass the over 2/3 Democatic-controlled House of Delegates and State Senate coalitions will be essential. By the issue’s essence this is not a partisan bill. In a global war with no end, all Americans who dissents are vulnerable to US military capture. The Bill of Rights has never been so threatened as by the NDAA indefinite detention provisions. Consider the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments repealed de facto.


TSA bill favorably received by Kansas House committee

As previously reported by Kelli Sladick, HB 2175 was introduced to the Kansas Legislature to limit TSA searches. Probable cause would be the new standard before public officials or employees could legally touch “the genitals, buttocks, anus or female breasts of suchperson, including touching through clothing.” There are also protections for children, prohibiting agents of the state from removing a child from the physical custody or control of the parent or guardian.

On Tuesday, February 12, after the Federal and State Affairs Committee heard HB 2175, author State Representative Brett Hildabrand tweeted:

Following hashtag “ksleg” on Twitter, @bradc25 reported Committee Chairman Arleen Siegfreid sensed support for the newly proposed TSA regulations. Committee member State Rep. J.R. Claeys seems at least open to such ideas as he tweeted:


Upcoming Pennsylvania Bill: Sell Pot to Citizens for Education Budget

Marijuana is fully legal in Colorado and Washington while 17 other states allow medical exemptions or decriminalization that effectively nullifies federal prohibition. Now State Senator Daylin Leach wants Pennsylvania to be the third state to regulate and tax marijuana like alcohol. What’s different from the other two is alcohol in Pennsylvania is exclusively sold in state-owned stores. Leach’s proposal has yet to be introduced as a bill, but it is already drawing debate and competition.

At the crux of the issue is the state education budget’s funding. While Governor Tom Corbett prefers privatizing the state liquor stores for around $1 billion, Senator Leach makes his “long-run” financial case on his website:

In addition to raising millions of dollars per year from tax revenue, Pennsylvania would save more than $325 million per year by legalizing marijuana. The most conservative estimates say the revenue generated by taxing the sales of marijuana would amount to at least $24 million per year.

Governor Corbett, a Republican, favors the status quo on marijuana prohibition, promising a veto. Senator Leach, a Democrat, favors the status quo on state-owned liquor stores. One wishes their bipartisan instincts would kick in for full privatization and legalization, but common sense only goes so far even at this promising point in the progressing push back against prohibition of marijuana. Tenth Amendment Center’s Communications Director, Mike Maharrey sees a clear path for Leach to take:


Indiana SB-127 Would Limit Federal Arrest Power

The power to arrest for federal officials in Indiana may face limits this year should State Senator Dennis Kruse’s legislation SB-127, the Indiana Sherrifs First Act, becomes law. That would mean as Sec. 1(a) states,

“a federal employee who is not designated by state law to act as a state law enforcement officer may not make an arrest, a search, or a seizure in Indiana unless, before making the arrest, search, or seizure, thefederal employee obtains the written permission of the sheriff or the designee of the sheriff who has jurisdiction in the county in which the arrest, search, or seizure will occur.”

There are exceptions in Sec. 1(b) which you can read here. The feds retain arresting power in federal enclaves, when a crime is imminent or witnessed and requires immediate action, the subject of arrest is employed by the sheriff, or if a state law designates the federal employee as a state law enforcer.

On Monday, January 7 the bill was read then introduced to the Committee on Rules and Legislative Procedure. If it passes, the law would take effect July 1. One sheriff hopes to see such a difference made.

“This is the type of positive state legislation that will help reign in federal usurpations of our Constitution,” said Sheriff of Elkhart County, Brad Rogers. If you don’t remember the name, this is the sheriff who took on the FDA when they threatened dairy farmers in his jurisdiction. Rogers continues, “However, we the people still have an obligation to elect sheriffs who will uphold their oath of office. Otherwise, a law such as this won’t go far in protecting us from what it is designed to do.”


Gold and Silver Legal Tender Law Introduced in Indiana

Senate Bill No. 99 has been introduced by State Senators Greg Walker and Jim Banks to free US-issued gold and silver coins from sales, use, and capital gains taxes.

SB-99 will add a new Chapter to the Indiana Code effectively making all taxes on gold and silver coins and transactions a thing of the past. From the bill’s synopsis:

Specifies that gold and silver coins issued by the United States government are legal tender in Indiana. Provides that a person may not compel another person to tender or accept gold or silver coins that are issued by the United States government, except as agreed upon by contract. Provides that the sale or other exchange of gold or silver coins issued by the United States government is exempt from state gross retail tax and use tax. Specifies that capital gains incurred on a sale or exchange of gold or silver coins issued by the United States government are not included in adjusted gross income for purposes of the state adjusted gross income tax.

On Monday, January 7 it will be read and referred to Committee on Tax and Fiscal Policy where co-author Sen. Walker sits. Should it pass on to the rest of the legislature then on to the governor’s desk and signed, the bill would become law by July 1 and the income tax aspects would be in effect January 1, 2014.

The fiscal impact report estimates that 2% of the US Mint’s gold and silver coins are in Indiana, calculating a $9.4 million loss in state revenue from retail and capital gains taxes. If accurate, that is a nice takeaway for Indianans who choose to transact with what the US Constitution lays out as legal tender under Article I, Section 10 – which reads “No State Shall…make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”


Slowly but Surely the Left Embraces States’ Rights

Earlier this month Huffington Post ran a live discussion titled States’ Rights Liberals. The panel shared the same progressive values and goals expressed by many critics of states’ rights, but in reflection of marijuana and gay marriage legalization victories this year, the panelists recognized a positive result of people ignoring Washington, D.C.

Their focus was on the same column from The Atlantic that TAC’s Joel Poindexter wrote about last week. Notice how far they’re willing to go in discussing the legitimacy of state sovereignty. With no intent of diminishing their gradual learning of the role of the several states, I must point out that not once was the 10th Amendment mentioned by Alyona Minkovski or the four guests.

“Racism and states’ rights is alive and well but it’s not one or the other – we have to separate, not all states’ rights are created equal, while we would probably put the rights for states to have legal slavery and marriage equality both under potential discussions, one is really about the taking away of rights from a group of people whereas the other is about remedying something,” stated David Pakman. Does David know the historic nature of the word “remedy” here? Judging by his understanding of slavery and states’ rights, perhaps not.


Washington D.C. is not Santa Claus

Christmastime myths are traditionally shared by millions of families across America and usually do no harm. There is one popular lore, however, that must be confronted once and for all: many still believe that Washington, D.C. is supposed to be Santa Claus, while the states are its worker elves.

The American system may be one of wonder and magic, but this common construction is just absurd. Or, at least, it would be absurd if not for the reality: the feds are constantly intervening as the welfare-warfare police-state, blindly believed to be a source of relief and generosity.

What has been the response to governors refusing to implement Obamacare exchanges? And to the voters choosing a different marijuana policy? Or to Texans legislating protections from the TSA? How about city councils not complying with NDAA indefinite detention? Calls of treason from the left and right have made the parable into conventional wisdom: resisting the central government is naughty, not nice.

“Stay in that assembled line states, just like good little elves so that Federal Santa can deliver the goods,” say the faithful masses.


States Decide on Obamacare Exchanges

President Barack Obama’s sound re-election amounted to a mandate according to the conventional wisdom of pundits on both sides of the mainstream debate over Obamacare. They believe the fight is over, so when in just a couple days all 50 states are asked to create exchanges and expand Medicaid, there isn’t much reason to fight…