Pushing Back on NDAA in Kansas

Kansas Representative O’Hara says that HR6021 (Opposition to NDAA) an important first step

In a hopeful attempt at interposition between the people of Kansas and the Federal Government, Chris Hong, wrote an April 25 article at L J World.com entitled “House committee looks at measure that advocates individual rights” that “The Veterans, Military and Homeland Security committee held a hearing on HR:6021, which opposes the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act signed by Pres. Obama. According to the resolution, the NDAA allows the ‘arrest, detention and rendition of American citizens without trial.’”

With a number of Kansans concerned that individual rights of Kansans (as well as those of people all across the United States) are under threat by the Federal Government’s NDAA measures – a reported “high number” of concerned people attended the hearing in the hopes of offering verbal support for HR:6021. In fact, it was stated that with testimony being limited to five minutes – it was still expected to require more than one session in order to hear everyone.

However, according to L J World, some leaders amongst the Kansas House believe that even if HR6021 should pass, the resolution wouldn’t have any effect on the Federal law.  “It’s just a statement,” said Rep. Mario Goico, R-Wichita.

“It doesn’t change anything other than make a statement on what the position of the House is.”

Details

ACTION ALERT: Help South Carolina Nullify the NDAA!

The senate finance committee is considering a bill, S. 1184, to amend state law, effectively nullifying sections of the NDAA authorizing indefinite detention. The bill prohibits the agencies of the state and its subdivisions, including their officers and employees, acting in official capacity from “[engaging] in any activity that aids an agency of the armed forces of the United States in execution of [the NDAA], in the investigation, prosecution, or detainment of any citizen of the United States in violation of Section 3, Article I, and Section 14, Article I of the South Carolina Constitution.”

S. 1184 was introduced February 7, 2012, and now sits in committee with two sponsors; an additional two sponsors have signed on from other committees. Given recent passage of Virginia’s own nullification of the NDAA, let’s continue this trend and send yet another message to the politicians in D.C. – we won’t allow them to abridge our liberties.

You are urged to contact individual members of South Carolina’s Senate Finance Committee, politely explaining why S. 1184 will help restore liberty and continue in the restoration of our Constitutional Republic. Should this bill pass, South Carolina will be the second state to reject the Feds and their unconscionable, unconstitutional NDAA.

Details

Will Kansas Interpose to Protect Residents Against NDAA?

April 3, 2012: It’s official. The people of Kansas are serious about protecting their natural rights, and won’t be led into the shackles of tyranny without a fight. Because, as reported at “Occupy 316”, members of Occupy Wichita recently recognized the 2012 NDAA passage for what it was, and staged a demonstration outside Senator Pat Roberts’ office – complete with detainees, a prison cell and private security personnel. (Senator Roberts was one of the Kansas Senators who voted Yes on NDAA, along with fellow Senator Jerry Moran, and Representatives Lynn Jenkins, Kevin Yoder and Mike Pompeo).

And as reported by Michael Boldin in the Tenth Amendment Center article “Cherokee County Rejects NDAA”, the people of this county didn’t wait around until their citizens began disappearing off the streets, but took preemptive action, unanimously passing a resolution in opposition to the NDAA.

But now, with the help of leaders like Kansas Rep. Charlotte O’Hara (Dist.  27), Kansas government may have an opportunity through HR 6021 to interpose (via nullification) on behalf of the people. For example, HR6021 makes clear that, “The NDAA contains provisions repugnant to, and destructive of, the constitutions and Bill of Rights of the United States of America, and this state, directly violating the U.S. Constitution’s Article I, Section 9 [Habeas Suspension Clause], Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 [Trial by jury of all crimes except impeachment], Article III, Section 3 [Treason Clause], Article IV, Section 4 [guarantee of a Republican Form of government] the 4th Amendment [Protection against unreasonable search and seizure] 5th Amendment [Right to grand jury indictment and due process], 6th Amendment [Right to speedy and public trial], 8th Amendment [Protection against cruel and unusual punishments], and 14th Amendment [Equal protection], as well as infringes on the entirety of the Bill of Rights and basic structure of the Constitution, making We the People insecure in the exercise of any of our Rights and Powers…

Because of the above injuries and usurpations of the Constitution, HR6021 states that the NDAA provisions are not only establishing an absolute tyranny over the states, but “are nearly identical to many of the long train of abuses and usurpations that compelled our forefathers to take up arms and to separate from Great Britain, as enumerated in The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, of July 4, 1776: Now, therefore, Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Kansas: That for the above and forgoing reasons, this Legislature expresses its belief that the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2012 (NDAA) is unconstitutional in authorizing the President to use war powers, the “law of war,” and/or martial law in the United States and its territories over any person…

Appreciate your right to free speech? Speak up!

Details
elk-county-pa

Elk County, PA Takes First Step In Nullifying NDAA

Prompted by citizens concerned over one of the federal government’s latest oversteps, the county commissioners in Elk County, Pennsylvania voted unanimously in favor of a resolution opposing sections of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012.

Shortly after the president signed the act into law, members of the local Tea Party addressed the county commissioners in a January 17th meeting, calling for the adoption of a resolution on behalf of the county’s residents. Blaise Dornisch, a member of the Elk County Tea Party, brought to the attention of the board sections of the act which expand the executive’s power to detain indefinitely U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism. The board promised to consider the issue and the meeting was closed.

At the following meeting, Resolution No. 2012-03 was unanimously adopted by the bi-partisan commission. Titled “To Preserve Habeas Corpus And Civil Liberties,” the resolution invokes both the Pennsylvania and U.S. Constitutions to defend the rights of county residents. The commissioners found that Sections 1021 and 1022 “jeopardize the fundamental rights of American citizens to remain free from detention without due process and the right to habeas corpus….” They further declare that such an act is “in direct contravention of the guarantees of the Bill of Rights of the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions.”

On its own, this resolution from a small county in Pennsylvania holds little weight. However, the county Sheriff’s department is in agreement, and has promised to support the resolution and “protect the constitutional rights of all citizens.”

Details

Who Voted Against the Constitution – Again?

In Who Voted Against the Constitution, we saw which of Pennsylvania’s Washington contingent voted for the unconstitutional provisions in the Patriot Act.

This post updates that information with another column to record how our legislators feel about the indefinite detention provisions in HR1540, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. The next-to-last column is the legislator’s vote for or against the Patriot Act, and the last column is the legislator’s vote for or against the 2012 NDAA.

Entries in red voted in favor of both acts. Entries in orange voted in favor of one, and entries in green voted against both.

Details
el-paso-co

Will Counties and Towns Nullify the NDAA?

Fremont, El Paso Counties in Colorado May Be Followed By Many More

Some people argue that principles of state sovereignty would be a pointless strategy in their state.  They argue that their statehouse is even more corrupt than the Feds and in some cases, they may have a point.

Fortunately there is much that can be done at the county level.  Sources are telling Tenth Amendment Center that there are a high number of counties in Colorado alone that are ready to turn back the NDAA.

What do you do when the Feds decide that they’re allowed to kidnap people?  Do you wait until you’ve made the ‘correct’ voting choices or do you do what Jefferson would have high-fived you for and tell the DC bureaucrats who seek to dominate we, the people, “NO!”.  “No, you may not enter this county and kidnap citizens of this county.”

Details

The Time Has Come

As we all set our intentions for 2012, I want to leave you with a thought.

One of my many tasks at the Tenth Amendment Center is to spend some time getting to know our prospects- those who have volunteered to take on an organizational role with the Tenth Amendment Center.  Today, the recruit I was talking to said something that stuck with me:

“Well, it seemed clear that it’s time for me to go from reading about what’s happening, to doing something about it.”

As I see it, there are basically three categories of Americans:

The first, are those who go through life, believing everything that the establishment tells them.  This category is shrinking fast.

Details