Idaho State Representatives Jim Clark, Lynn Luker, and Raul Labrador have House Bill 391 (H0391), which proposes an act to protect the right of free choice of health care services for the people of Idaho.
The language of the bill includes:
The power to require or regulate a person’s choice in the mode of securing health care services, or to impose a penalty related thereto, is not found in the Constitution of the United States of America, and is therefore a power reserved to the people pursuant to the Ninth Amendment, and to the several states pursuant to the Tenth Amendment. The state of Idaho hereby exercises its sovereign power to declare the public policy of the state of Idaho regarding the right of all persons residing in the state of Idaho in choosing the mode of securing health care services.
When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.
But nullification is more than just a mere rhetorical statement or a resolution affirming the position of the legislature. To effectively nullify the law requires actions to prevent its enforcement within the state – something that James Madison referred to as “interposition” in his Virginia Resolution of 1798.
More from H0391:
No public official, employee, or agent of the state of Idaho or any of its political subdivisions, shall act to impose, collect, enforce, or effectuate any penalty in the state of Idaho that violates the public policy set forth in section 399003(2), Idaho Code.
New Hampshire recently introduced a bill to make law that not only makes federal restrictions of health care choices illegal in the state, but also expressly prohibits interference in these choices by federal agents and requires state agencies to interpose as a protection.
Click here to learn more.
CLICK HERE to see the Tenth Amendment Center’s Health Care Nullification Tracking Page