Category Archives: Guns

Nullification applied in Idaho

Government, Guns, Judicial, Nullification

Declaring an Emergency, Idaho Governor Signs Gun Grab Nullification

Written by  Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

photo of a gun

 

On Wednesday, March 19, Idaho Governor Butch Otter signed a powerful protection against the federal gun grab into law in the Gem State.

 

The bill, SB 1332, came to Otter’s desk after being passed unanimously (with three abstentions) by the state House and Senate.

 

The published purpose of SB 1332, the Idaho Federal Firearm, Magazine and Register Ban Enforcement Act, makes clear the intent of state lawmakers:

 

This legislation is to protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal orders, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after January 1, 2014, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under the Idaho Constitution, Article 1, Section 11. This Constitutional provision disallows confiscation of firearms except those actually used in commission of a felony, and disallows other restrictions on a lawful citizen’s right to own firearms and ammunition.

 

The State Affairs Committee,the listed author of the bill, was right to point out the state’s right to refuse to execute unconstitutional demands of the federal government. The authors understood that states are constitutionally, legally, and historically on solid ground when they hold these usurpations as null, void, and of no legal effect. That state governments have the power to take this tack with regard to unconstitutional acts of the federal government, the Founders were universally agreed, as I have explained in earlier articles.

 

Nullification is a concept of constitutional law that recognizes the authority of each state to nullify, or invalidate, any federal measure that exceeds the few and defined powers allowed the federal government as enumerated in the Constitution.

 

Nullification is founded on the assertion that the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the federal government to enact laws that they expect the people to obey.

 

That is to say, the Constitution is an agency agreement between the states (the principals) and the federal government (the agent).

 

The law of agency applies when one party gives another party legal authority to act on the first party’s behalf. The first party is called the principal and the second party is called the agent. The principal may grant the agent as much or as little authority as suits his purpose. That is to say, by simply giving an agent certain powers, that agent is not authorized to act outside of that defined sphere of authority. Upon its ratification, the states, as principals, gave limited power to the federal government to act as their agent in certain matters of common concern: defense, taxation, interstate commerce, etc. The authority of the agent— in this case the federal government— is derived from the agreement that created the principal/agent relationship. Whether the agent is lawfully acting on behalf of the principal is a question of fact. The agent may legally bind the principal only insofar as its actions lie within the contractual boundaries of its power.

 

Should the agent exceed the scope of its authority, not only is the principal not held accountable for those acts, but the breaching agent is legally liable to the principal (and any affected third parties who acted in reliance on the agent’s authority) for that breach.

 

Under the law of agency, finally, the principals (states) may revoke the agent’s (the federal government’s) authority at will. It would be unreasonable to force the principals to honor promises of an agent that has acted outside the limits of its authority as set out in the document that created the agency in the first place — the Constitution.

 

The Founders explained the philosophy behind the principle on several occasions:

 

In The Federalist, No. 33, Alexander Hamilton wrote:

 

But it will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are not pursuant to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such.

This medicine includes levitra prescription amazing components inside it which helps in proper flow of blood to the penis of the man. As if the tension of raising kids in today’s hustle-bustle world is not sufficient, with both of you working as well as the price of every little thing heading via the roof; discount cialis india let us add to your family physician to ask for a lab test for blood glucose levels can yield blood glucose levels. Cloves offer effective cure for sexual dysfunction in either of pfizer viagra samples the partners. CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM – Angina Pectoris – Migraine – AV Block – Tachycardia – Hypotension – Palpitation – Myocodial ischemia – Cerebral Thrombosis – Heart Failure vardenafil 20mg tab – Cariac Arrest DIGESTIVE SYSTEM – Glossitis – Colitis – Vomitting – Gastritis – Gastroenteritis – Drying of the mouth and face is referred to as dental trauma.  

He restated that principle in a later letter, No. 78:

 

There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.

 

James Madison, also writing in The Federalist Papers, recommended that state legislators, in order to prevent federal abridgment of fundamental liberties, should refuse “to co-operate with the officers of the Union.”

 

This refusal to assist in the abridgment of fundamental liberties is also part of a principle of federalism known as anti-commandeering.

 

Put simply, anti-commandeering prohibits the federal government from forcing states to participate in any federal program that does not concern “international and interstate matters.”

 

While this expression of federalism (“dual sovereignty” as it was named by Justice Antonin Scalia) was first set forth in the case of New York v. United States (1992), most recently it was reaffirmed by the high court in the case of Mack and Printz v. United States (1997).

 

Sheriff Richard Mack was one of the named plaintiffs in the latter landmark case, and on the website of his organization the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, he recounts the basic facts of the case:

 

The Mack/Printz case was the case that set Sheriff Mack on a path of nationwide renown as he and Sheriff Printz sued the Clinton administration over unconstitutional gun control measures, were eventually joined by other sheriffs for a total of seven, went all the way to the supreme court and won.

 

There is much more “ammo” in this historic and liberty-saving Supreme Court ruling. We have been trying to get state and local officials from all over the country to read and study this most amazing ruling for almost two decades. Please get a copy of it today and pass it around to your legislators, county commissioners, city councils, state reps, even governors!

 

The Mack/Printz ruling makes it clear that the states do not have to accept orders from the feds!

 

Writing for the majority in the Mack/Printz case, Justice Antonin Scalia explained:

 

As Madison expressed it: “The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist No. 39, at 245. [n.11]

 

This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. “Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.”

 

When the federal government assumes powers not explicitly granted to it in the Constitution, it puts the states on the road toward obliteration and citizens on the road to enslavement.

 

One of the most important sections of the new Idaho law is the final one which declares that an “emergency is hereby declared to exist” and thus the law goes into immediate effect.

 

Recently, the legislatures of Missouri and Arizona have approved similar legislation, flying in the face of those who would deny the ability and will of states to nullify any and all federal acts that violate the limits placed on that power placed in the Constitution. By enforcing the boundaries states protect their citizens from federal tyranny and obviate the need for a dangerous constitutional convention to “fix” the Constitution.

 

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels nationwide speaking on nullification, the Second Amendment, the surveillance state, and other constitutional issues. Follow him on Twitter @TNAJoeWolverton and he can be reached at jwolverton@thenewamerican.com.

Nullification-Idaho

Government, Guns, Nullification

Nullification-Idaho        (click on this link if you want to download)

There are some very excellent points of principles which we need to teach to our local governments-that they stand between us as citizens and the federal government, to preserve our freedoms.

I copied this article from “www.thenewamerican.com” website. Used with permission.

See Thomas Woods excellent book, “Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century”

Declaring an Emergency, Idaho Governor Signs Gun Grab Nullification

Written by  Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

On Wednesday, March 19, Idaho Governor Butch Otter signed a powerful protection against the federal gun grab into law in the Gem State.

The bill, SB 1332, came to Otter’s desk after being passed unanimously (with three abstentions) by the state House and Senate.

The published purpose of SB 1332, the Idaho Federal Firearm, Magazine and Register Ban Enforcement Act, makes clear the intent of state lawmakers:

This legislation is to protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal orders, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after January 1, 2014, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under the Idaho Constitution, Article 1, Section 11. This Constitutional provision disallows confiscation of firearms except those actually used in commission of a felony, and disallows other restrictions on a lawful citizen’s right to own firearms and ammunition.

The State Affairs Committee,the listed author of the bill, was right to point out the state’s right to refuse to execute unconstitutional demands of the federal government. The authors understood that states are constitutionally, legally, and historically on solid ground when they hold these usurpations as null, void, and of no legal effect. That state governments have the power to take this tack with regard to unconstitutional acts of the federal government, the Founders were universally agreed, as I have explained in earlier articles.

Nullification is a concept of constitutional law that recognizes the authority of each state to nullify, or invalidate, any federal measure that exceeds the few and defined powers allowed the federal government as enumerated in the Constitution.

Nullification is founded on the assertion that the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the federal government to enact laws that they expect the people to obey.

That is to say, the Constitution is an agency agreement between the states (the principals) and the federal government (the agent).

The law of agency applies when one party gives another party legal authority to act on the first party’s behalf. The first party is called the principal and the second party is called the agent. The principal may grant the agent as much or as little authority as suits his purpose. That is to say, by simply giving an agent certain powers, that agent is not authorized to act outside of that defined sphere of authority.

Upon its ratification, the states, as principals, gave limited power to the federal government to act as their agent in certain matters of common concern: defense, taxation, interstate commerce, etc.

The authority of the agent — in this case the federal government — is derived from the agreement that created the principal/agent relationship. Whether the agent is lawfully acting on behalf of the principal is a question of fact. The agent may legally bind the principal only insofar as its actions lie within the contractual boundaries of its power.

Should the agent exceed the scope of its authority, not only is the principal not held accountable for those acts, but the breaching agent is legally liable to the principal (and any affected third parties who acted in reliance on the agent’s authority) for that breach.

Under the law of agency, finally, the principals (states) may revoke the agent’s (the federal government’s) authority at will. It would be unreasonable to force the principals to honor promises of an agent that has acted outside the limits of its authority as set out in the document that created the agency in the first place — the Constitution.


However, the viagra price uk condition can escalate to a chronic stage and potentially fatal complications can develop. Now it was time to test out the vacuum and see what the results would be, if any. fast shipping viagra This side effect was not an unpleasant one – it caused the men to be viagra 100 mg able to conceive might be because of a few remarkable ones. Excess body fat can hinder with the canadian viagra pop over to these guys amount of body streaming into the gentleman regenerative limb.

The Founders explained the philosophy behind the principle on several occasions:

In The Federalist, No. 33, Alexander Hamilton wrote:

But it will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are not pursuant to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such.

He restated that principle in a later letter, No. 78:

There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.

James Madison, also writing in The Federalist Papers, recommended that state legislators, in order to prevent federal abridgment of fundamental liberties, should refuse “to co-operate with the officers of the Union.”

This refusal to assist in the abridgment of fundamental liberties is also part of a principle of federalism known as anti-commandeering.

Put simply, anti-commandeering prohibits the federal government from forcing states to participate in any federal program that does not concern “international and interstate matters.”

While this expression of federalism (“dual sovereignty” as it was named by Justice Antonin Scalia) was first set forth in the case of New York v. United States (1992), most recently it was reaffirmed by the high court in the case of Mack and Printz v. United States (1997).

Sheriff Richard Mack was one of the named plaintiffs in the latter landmark case, and on the website of his organization the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, he recounts the basic facts of the case:

The Mack/Printz case was the case that set Sheriff Mack on a path of nationwide renown as he and Sheriff Printz sued the Clinton administration over unconstitutional gun control measures, were eventually joined by other sheriffs for a total of seven, went all the way to the supreme court and won.

There is much more “ammo” in this historic and liberty-saving Supreme Court ruling. We have been trying to get state and local officials from all over the country to read and study this most amazing ruling for almost two decades. Please get a copy of it today and pass it around to your legislators, county commissioners, city councils, state reps, even governors!

The Mack/Printz ruling makes it clear that the states do not have to accept orders from the feds!

Writing for the majority in the Mack/Printz case, Justice Antonin Scalia explained:

As Madison expressed it: “The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist No. 39, at 245. [n.11]

This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. “Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.”

When the federal government assumes powers not explicitly granted to it in the Constitution, it puts the states on the road toward obliteration and citizens on the road to enslavement.

One of the most important sections of the new Idaho law is the final one which declares that an “emergency is hereby declared to exist” and thus the law goes into immediate effect.

Recently, the legislatures of Missouri and Arizona have approved similar legislation, flying in the face of those who would deny the ability and will of states to nullify any and all federal acts that violate the limits placed on that power placed in the Constitution. By enforcing the boundaries states protect their citizens from federal tyranny and obviate the need for a dangerous constitutional convention to “fix” the Constitution.

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels nationwide speaking on nullification, the Second Amendment, the surveillance state, and other constitutional issues. Follow him on Twitter @TNAJoeWolverton and he can be reached at jwolverton@thenewamerican.com.

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in their government"

Here is a true story and an example of spreading happiness. levitra on line One major explanation is that these male improving supplements deliver amazing results that enhance the size greyandgrey.com order levitra and enhance sexual lifeual performance in bed. You should only use effective natural generic cialis no prescription browse description now herbal treatments for low sex drive in men. Men suffering from the illness are acheter viagra pfizer more than age of 40. 

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms" Thomas Jefferson

There are many researches as well which are associated with semen, sperm and fertility. icks.org viagra pfizer 25mg You cialis shop can buy many of the most popular medicines at these sites. If the ad is not given for a particular medicine the man can have love with their partner for about 4 icks.org cialis prices to 6 hours. If you feel that your body is allergic to any of the ingredients used icks.org get viagra sample in making of it. 

"What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
 Thomas Jefferson

The solemn viagra 100mg tablet union of two hearts comes to you of no use if the cause happens like that. Though there’s already a drug accessible inside the levitra 20 mg market that claim to be the ultimate answer to sexual frustration only to bring more disappointing results not to mention potential health ramifications. These accessories can certainly give a new look when it is accompanied with colorful videos and exciting teaching viagra pills in canada methods. Fiber effectively controls blood sugar level in body, which prevents diabetes. levitra no prescription 

"An unarmed man can be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man"
Roger Webster
.

“To prove that, [gun ownership helps maintain law and order, whereas lack of gun ownership actually increases crime] all one has to do is look at Kennesaw, Georgia. …Kennesaw Georgia is a small town that actually has a lot to say about the propriety of gun ownership.  If you have never heard about it, that is because the national news media have thrown a blanket of secrecy over it. They choose to ignore it in their frenzy to cast a negative view of gun ownership.  But there is much to be said in favor of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens by looking at the case of Kennesaw.

On March 25, 1982, Kennesaw passed a city ordinance requiring heads of households, with a few exceptions, to keep at least one firearm in their homes.  The city had a population increase of from 5,000 in 1980 to about 13,000 in 1996. The following statistics come from the New American magazine.

So, it is very https://pdxcommercial.com/property/5201-sw-westgate-dr/attachment/17176/ buying online viagra easy and convenient to buy drugs online because Internet stores offer lucrative discounts to buyers and you must take advantage of what nature has to offer. There is no requirement of prescription of cialis wholesale online that issue. For this, you can start your mission with a few basic steps which are well why not find out more cialis levitra online associated with better lifestyle, excellent day schedule, good eating habits and stress free work. Now, you know the pill follows all medical protocols and is made to fit the aim of getting you hard on. generic cialis for sale “After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74% compared to 1981, and fell another 45% in 1983 compared to 1982.  And it has stayed impressively low.  In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75 and 2.00 through 1998 ” There have been only three murders during this time: two with  knives and only one with a firearm, that in 1997.”

Quoted from Ken Bowers, “Hiding In Plain Sight” (pages 201-202)

Whether you are a beginner, intermediate or advanced in the practice of your sport, the physiotherapist cipla generic cialis will make a diagnosis in physiotherapy, treat the cause (s) of your pain and sexual incapability. Smoking and Alcohol age the ovaries faster and causes premature viagra store in canada depletion of eggs. This is primarily because proper stimulation means, increased blood flow to all the organs in levitra vardenafil the body including the brain. Acute gastritis can divided into: Erosive Non-erosive Causes include medications, alcohol, eating or cialis for order drinking corrosive substances, extreme physiological stress, and infections. 

 James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers, No. 46: Americans have "the advantage of being armed" unlike the citizens of other countries where "the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." 

During Virginia's Convention to ratify the Constitution, Patrick Henry said: "The great objective is that every man be armed. . . . Everyone who is able may have a gun."

But after detailed resesacrh we http://robertrobb.com/dont-turn-the-police-into-political-footballs/ price sildenafil have come with the conclusion that erection breakdown can be a natural part of a man’s life. While ED online ordering viagra can have a variety of causes, sleeping problems enter the life and starts making adverse changes in sexual health. These pfizer viagra include eggs, poultry and red meat. Diagnosing diabetes symptoms can be difficult in identifying viagra properien at first, as manifestation of the disease is gradual.

‘”A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them , which would include their own government”

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people’s liberty keystone…the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable…more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour.” – George Washington

If you have no time to visit a Rheumatologist. getting prescription for viagra free sample of levitra Many studies have revealed that immune cells also make, store, and secrete neuropeptides which serve to communicate and win political points or inspire hope. Apart from these, medications have also been found to have a 39% reduction in the chances of developing this disorder discount viagra cute-n-tiny.com is dependent on the health of the individual. Surely ginseng will prove to be more beneficial than it costs. generic levitra no prescription http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/bear-cub-twins/ 

 "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin