Tag Archives: nullify

Activism, Civil Liberties, Politics, States Rights

Tennessee Lawmakers Introduce Bill Nullifying Gay Marriage Decision

Leave a comment
Sept. 17, 2015-- Nearly 1,000 Tennessee Christians rally for traditional marriage at the state capitol where legislators introduce bill to nullify Supreme Court's gay marriage decision.
Sept. 17, 2015– Nearly 1,000 Tennessee Christians rally for traditional marriage at the state capitol where legislators introduce a bill to nullify the Supreme Court’s gay marriage decision.

NASHVILLE, September 17, 2015– On Thursday, almost a thousand conservative Christians gathered at the Tennessee state capitol for a rally today that featured many Republican legislators prepared to fight the Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage.

At the rally, State Senator Mae Beavers (R-Mt. Juliet) and State Representative Mark Pody (R-Lebanon) announced legislation calling for Tennessee to defend current state law and the constitutional amendment adopted by voters in 2006 specifying that only a marriage between a man and a woman can be legally recognized in the state. The “Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act” rejects the Obergefell v. Hodges decision handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in June giving same sex couples the fundamental right to marry and calls on the attorney general and reporter to defend any state or local government official from any lawsuit to the contrary.

House Bill 1412 / Senate Bill 1437 also aims to protect court clerks and ministers who have religious objections to marrying same sex couples from prosecution or civil action.

“This decision defies constitutional authority and is one of the most glaring examples of judicial activism in U.S. Supreme Court history,” said Representative Pody. “It not only tramples on state’s rights, but has paved the way for an all-out assault on the religious freedoms of Christians who disagree with it. This bill calls for Tennessee to stand against such unconstitutional action in hopes that other states will stand with us against an out-of-control court legislating from the bench.”

“Natural marriage between one man and one woman as recognized by the people of this state remains the law, regardless of any court decision to the contrary,” said Senator Beavers. “The Obergefell case is clearly and blatantly an overstep of the Supreme Court’s Authority and it is time that states, like Tennessee, stand up against the judicial tyranny of which Thomas Jefferson so eloquently warned. This legislation deems that any court decision purporting to strike down the state’s definitions of natural marriage, including Obergefell v. Hodges, is void in Tennessee.”

“Thomas Jefferson was quoted as saying, ‘Whenever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force,'” said Beavers.

Beavers’ and Pody’s legislation says, “No state or local agency or official shall give force or effect to any court order that has the effect of violating Tennessee’s laws protecting natural marriage.”

It also says, “No state or local agency or official shall levy upon the property or arrest the person of any government official or individual who does not comply with any unlawful court order regarding natural marriage within Tennessee.”

“Our clerks and Tennessee’s clergy need protection to exercise their religious beliefs,” added Beavers. “This law would help protect them from prosecution or civil actions.”

Tennessee’s marriage protection amendment specifying that only a marriage between a man and woman can be legally recognized in the state was approved by 81 percent of voters.

The General Assembly will take up the bill upon convening the 2016 legislative session in January.

FOLLOW MICHAEL LOTFI ON Facebook, Twitter & LinkedIn.

 

Politics

Air Force Vet Wakes Up in Federal Prison on Veterans Day

62 Comments

WASHINGTON, November 12, 2014–Decorated 20-year Air Force veteran and former firearms instructor at the Sig Sauer Academy, Timothy Arnold, woke up this Veterans Day in federal prison. Arnold was convicted earlier this year in a civilian court in Brunswick, Georgia, of manufacturing firearms and embezzlement—charges Arnold and many of his colleagues openly dispute. Active duty Office of Special Investigations (OSI) agents filed numerous complaints with the Inspector General (IG) regarding lead investigator Wendell Palmer’s “unethical” practices while building the case against Arnold. The information about the affidavits and the pending IG investigation was withheld from the court, in direct violation of the Supreme Court’s Brady doctrine requiring prosecutor Fred Kramer to disclose it. Additionally, the testimony of the defense’s star witness was prevented by unsubstantiated allegations of his contempt of court—testimony the would-be witness claims would have exonerated Arnold.

Thanks to exclusive reports filed earlier on BenSwann, Arnold’s case is receiving national attention and is the subject of an official Congressional Inquiry into its handling. Those with knowledge about the case continue to come forward, outraged that this prosecutorial tragedy happened at all, much less to a man they consistently describe as “honest to a fault” and “full of integrity.”

Tim Arnold served his country for 20 years and executed many top secret missions. Now he serves time in prison.
Tim Arnold served his country for 20 years and executed many top secret missions. Now he serves time in prison.

Before Arnold self-surrendered to the United States Penitentiary that currently holds him, he addressed several mischaracterizations made during the trial. Assistant United States Attorney Kramer accused Arnold of purchasing “stenciled golf balls” and other items “he and his friends thought were cool” using the government-issued credit card. “Yes, I bought golf balls! I also bought custom pins, pens, lighters, coffee cups, and shot glasses with the OSI insignia on them,” Arnold says, “That is what is known as swag. It is customary to give small tokens like these to visiting dignitaries, foreign agents attending training, and those you need to thank while on out-of-country assignments. In keeping with OSI regulations, I turned the swag over to the Commodities Custodian and would then ‘sign it out’ as needed.” Arnold said he was the recipient of such swag from the White Houses of both President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush. He says small gestures like these are traditional throughout the military.

Kramer accused Arnold of impersonating a law enforcement officer. Arnold says he used the AFOSI-issued badge and credentials provided to him, as he had done for years. He also willingly surrendered the badges to investigators for examination. The prosecution claimed Arnold wore various patches and pretended to be in different branches of the military. “I did wear different shirts depending upon what scenario I set up for my firearms and tactics classes,” Arnold said after the trial. “I never ran around town claiming to be an Army Ranger, a Marine sniper, or anything else.” Another detail not revealed in the trial was that during Arnold’s Air Force career, he was actually part of an elite Air Mobility Command. The jury heard a different story, however. “He’s a poser. He’s a fraud,” Kramer told them. “This is a man with no honor in him.”

Arnold refused to plead guilty to any of the charges during pre-trial negotiations and proceeded with a costly trial in order to clear his name. OSI agents who testified for the defense were shocked that a case with falsified evidence at the hands of who they believe to be an unethical fellow investigator sailed all the way through the legal system. Those who signed affidavits complaining about Palmer’s tactics are currently following up on them via every channel available. The Congressional inquiry is active. Arnold himself expects his record to be expunged once the truth is revealed. His last words before entering prison were, “I have only begun to fight.”

Related Articles

EXCLUSIVE: Air Force Veteran and Firearms Expert Convicted of Manufacturing Weapons Speaks Out

Exclusive: Air Force Vet/Firearms Expert Sentenced to Prison

 

 

Politics, US

South Carolina Passes Bill To Nullify Federal Hemp Ban

1 Comment

COLUMBIA, May 14, 2014– Yesterday, the South Carolina House gave final approval to a bill which authorizes the growing and production of industrial hemp within the state, effectively nullifying the unconstitutional federal ban.

Introduced by Sen. Kevin Bryant along with cosponsors Sen. Lee Bright and Sen. Tom Davis, S.0839 passed by a 72-28 vote in the House. It has previous passed by a vote of 42-0 in the senate and will now go to Gov. Nikki Haley’s desk for a signature.

The bill reads, in part:

“It is lawful for an individual to cultivate, produce, or otherwise grow industrial hemp in this State to be used for any lawful purpose, including, but not limited to, the manufacture of industrial hemp products, and scientific, agricultural, or other research related to other lawful applications for industrial hemp.”

Follow Michael Lotfi On Facebook & Twitter.

Health, Politics, US

Establishment GOP join Democrats to kill anti-Obamacare bill in South Carolina, rebellious Republicans resurrect it

4 Comments

COLUMBIA, S.C., March 27,2014– The fight to nullify Obamacare in South Carolina continues with a bill introduced in the state House by Rep. Bill Chumley (R) on Tuesday.

The year-long effort to nullify the ACA in the Palmetto State seemed to be dead in the water after parliamentary maneuvering by establishment Republicans in the Senate killed H3101 last week.

H3101 was originally known as the “Obamacare nullification bill” because it declared the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act unconstitutional and void within the state. After significant narrowing, the South Carolina House passed the bill 65-34. But the initiative floundered in the Senate and was carried over to the current legislative session.

Over the summer, H3101 Senate sponsor  Senator Tom Davis (R) developed a new strategy for the bill. Instead of relying on a determination of constitutionality and declaring the ACA illegal, he worked with others to craft language based on the well-established anti-commandeering doctrine. The so-called “strike-all”  amendment would have replace the full text of the bill, banning the state from participating in the implementation of the main pillars of the federal act.

While passage wouldn’t void the legal status of the federal act, it would be a significant blow to its implementation. Some call it a “nullification in practice.” Judge Andrew Napolitano has said that this action would “gut Obamacare.” James Madison, writing in Federalist #46, said that a “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” would create effective roadblocks to stop implementation of federal acts.

Last week, the South Carolina Senate voted down H3101 (33-9) after Republican Lt. Gov. Glenn McConnell ruled every amendment filed on the bill banning the state from enforcing Obamacare ‘not germane’ and refused to allow debate or a vote. He did this knowing that the House version didn’t have the votes to pass.

State Senator Lee Bright (R), the current Tea Party favorite to defeat U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham for his U.S. Senate seat, told BenSwann.com, “I was proud to stand with eight other senators to fight Obamacare in South Carolina.”

Refusing to concede defeat, Chumley and Rep. Bill Davis (R), along with 25 cosponsors, introduced H.4979 with identical language to the Davis amendment.


“If the State Senate can’t block ‘Obamacare’ in South Carolina, we’ll try again in the House of Representatives,” Bill Davis said. “Rep. Bill Chumley and I co-sponsored legislation today identical to Sen. Tom Davis’ Anti-Commandeering amendment. His efforts were rejected by the Senate last week as being out of order while they were debating the ‘Obamacare Nullification’ bill.”

The legislation prohibits the state from implementing or participating in the “establishment of a health insurance exchange,” or expanding Medicaid under the federal Act. It also prohibits the state from taking actions to “assist in the enrollment of any person” in an exchange. It will also specifically target the individual and employer mandates. It prohibits the state from enforcing or even aiding in the enforcement of either section. This includes an express prohibition on the use of any “assets, state funds or funds authorized or allocated by the state to any public body… to engage in any activity that aids in the enforcement of any federal act, law, order, rule, or regulation intended to give effect to or facilitate the enforcement” of those two sections of the ACA. Finally, the bill creates a new “transparency in grants” procedure to make the receipt and use of grant money under the ACA extremely difficult, if not politically impossible.

Sen. Davis reportedly plans to introduce the amendment language as a separate bill in the Senate as well. Activist Jesse Graston says he thinks the strategy could save the legislation because it enjoys widespread support among lawmakers.

“The only reason the Davis amendment did not get a vote was because of the perverse interpretation of the germaneness rule by Lt. Gov. Glenn McConnell, he said. “By having the bills introduced with the exact same language in both the House and Senate, we should have no problem. The fact that the Senate has already debated the Davis amendment for three weeks and was ready to vote for it is massive in the sense that we can justify it’s fast track back onto the Senate floor, because they have already declared their support for it and voted cloture once already.”

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Featured, Politics, US

BREAKING: Idaho governor signs emergency legislation nullifying all future federal gun laws

640 Comments

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

BOISE, March 21, 2014 – On Thursday, Idaho Governor Butch Otter (R) signed a bill, which would effectively nullify future federal gun laws, by prohibiting state enforcement of any future federal act relating to personal firearms, a firearm accessories or ammunition.

S1332 passed the house by a vote of 68-0 and the senate by a vote of 34-0. Alaska and Kansas have also passed similar laws.

Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America, cheered the governor’s action. “By signing this nullification bill into law, Idaho has joined an elite class of states that are telling the feds to ‘get lost’ — especially when it comes to unconstitutional gun control infringements”

Introduced by the State Affairs Committee, the Idaho Federal Firearm, Magazine and Register Ban Enforcement Act, will:

“protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal executive orders, agency orders, statutes, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after the effective date of this act, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under Section 11, Article I, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho.”

The legislation continued:

any official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof who knowingly and willfully orders an official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision of the state to enforce any executive order, agency order, law, rule or regulation of the United States government as provided in subsection (2) of this section upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition shall, on a first violation, be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) which shall be paid into the general fund of the state…

S1332 also includes an emergency provision meaning it takes effect immediately upon signature.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey considered the legislation a good start. “This is an important first step for Idaho,” he said. “Getting this law passed will ensure that any new plans or executive orders that might be coming our way will not be enforced in Idaho. Then, once this method is established and shown to be effective, legislators can circle back and start doing the same for federal gun control already on the books. SB1332 is an important building block for protecting the 2nd Amendment in Idaho.”

Passage into law represents a giant step forward in protecting the right to keep and bear arms in Idaho. As the law now stands, state and local law enforcement will not cooperate with all future federal firearm laws.

The bill rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce and federal act or program The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. United States serves as the cornerstone.

Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin said that the new Idaho law has opened Pandora’s box even wider.

“People are beginning to realize that this practice is completely constitutional and legal. In the near future, you will see a wave of states passing even broader legislation to fight the federal government on everything ranging from more traditionally liberal issues like hemp and marijuana, to more conservative issues like Obamacare.” Boldin continued, “Nullification isn’t a left vs. right issue. It destroys the fallacy of the left right paradigm and is the remedy for all unconstitutional laws.”

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Health, Politics, US

Georgia Republicans push for Obamacare by killing bill meant to stop it

5 Comments

ATLANTA, March 18, 2014- Establishment Republicans joined democrats Monday in an effort to destroy a bill that would have placed a massive thorn in the President’s healthcare law from within the state of Georgia.

“That eleventh hour betrayal effectively killed the bill, but it could still be brought back to life by amendment of companion legislation,” said HB707 chief sponsor Representative Jason Spencer. “I will identify the Republican Benedict Arnolds, the King George the Third and his myrmidons who ship wrecked my path breaking, patriotic bill (HB707) to prevent the federal Leviathan from commandeering the machinery of state government or resources to enforce ill-conceived federal health insurance mandates. A patriot saves his country from his government. HB707 would have been the first occasion in a century to draw a constitutional line against state complicity in endless federal encroachments.”

The House voted 115:59 to approve Spencer’s bill two weeks ago.

Republican senators Staton, Chance, B. Miller, F. Millar, J. Murphy and Renee Unterman all voted along with Democrats to table the bill in the Senate, which effectively killed it at that moment.

Georgia, having a Republican super-majority, illustrates a prime example of Republican legislators using campaign rhetoric against Obamacare to win reelection, but refusing to actually legally stop the federal healthcare mandate when given the chance.

Click the hyperlink to learn more about what HB707 would have done to cause Obamacare pain in Georgia.

UPDATE: Legislators attached the previously dead bill as an amendment to an unrelated piece of legislation as a last effort to pass it through to the Governor. The maneuver succeeded and the legislation will now move to the governor for signature. However, the legislation is now grossly watered down.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Politics, US

South Carolina legislators vote to override federal hemp ban

4 Comments

COLUMBIA, March 14, 2014– On Thursday afternoon the South Carolina senate sent a bill over to the state house which would authorize the growing and production of industrial hemp within the state, effectively nullifying the unconstitutional federal ban on the same.

Introduced by Sen. Kevin Bryant along with cosponsors Sen. Lee Bright(R) (challenging US Senator Lindsey Graham) and Sen. Tom Davis(R), S.0839 passed by a 42-0 unanimous vote this week.

The bill reads, in part, “It is lawful for an individual to cultivate, produce, or otherwise grow industrial hemp in this State to be used for any lawful purpose, including, but not limited to, the manufacture of industrial hemp products, and scientific, agricultural, or other research related to other lawful applications for industrial hemp.”

Experts suggest that the U.S. market for hemp is around $500 million per year. They count as many as 25,000 uses for industrial hemp, including food, cosmetics, plastics and bio-fuel. The U.S. is currently the world’s #1 importer of hemp fiber for various products, with China and Canada acting as the top two exporters in the world.

This month, President Barack Obama signed a new farm bill into law, which included a provision allowing a handful of states to begin limited research programs growing hemp. The new “hemp amendment”

…allows State Agriculture Departments, colleges and universities to grow hemp, defined as the non-drug oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis, for academic or agricultural research purposes, but it applies only to states where industrial hemp farming is already legal under state law.

Three states – Colorado, Oregon and Vermont – have already passed similar measures. Farmers in SE Colorado started harvesting the plant in 2013, effectively nullifying federal restrictions on such agricultural activities.

S.0839 now moves on to the state house where it will first be assigned to a committee for consideration before the full house has an opportunity to send the bill to Gov. Haley’s desk for a signature.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Featured, Politics, US

BREAKING: Idaho legislators vote on emergency bill to nullify federal gun laws- Awaits Governor’s signature

7 Comments

BOISE, March 13, 2014–  Wednesday night the Idaho state House passed a bill which would effectively nullify future federal gun laws by prohibiting state enforcement of any future federal act relating to personal firearms, a firearm accessories or ammunition. The vote was 68-0. It previously passed the state Senate by a vote of 34-0, and will now go to the Governor Otter’s desk for a signature.

Introduced by the State Affairs Committee, the Idaho Federal Firearm, Magazine and Register Ban Enforcement Act, or SB1332, would

“protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal executive orders, agency orders, statutes, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after the effective date of this act, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under Section 11, Article I, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho.”

The legislation continued:

“any official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof who knowingly and willfully orders an official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision of the state to enforce any executive order, agency order, law, rule or regulation of the United States government as provided in subsection (2) of this section upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition shall, on a first violation, be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) which shall be paid into the general fund of the state…”

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano has suggested that a single state standing down would make new federal gun laws “nearly impossible to enforce” within that state.

James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” also advised this very tactic.  Madison supplied the blueprint for resisting federal power in Federalist 46. He outlined several steps that states can take to effective stop “an unwarrantable measure,” or “even a warrantable measure” of the federal government. Madison called for “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” as a way to successfully thwart federal acts.

SB1332 also includes an emergency provision meaning it takes effect immediately upon passage to the law books.

Notice the “on or after the effective date of this act” clause, because this differentiates SB1332 from other legislation proposed in states such as Arizona and Missouri to resist all federal infringement of the right to bear arms. These bills would end state compliance with all federal firearms laws. The Idaho bill would apply to future acts.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey considered the legislation a good start. “This is an important first step for Idaho,” he said. “Getting this law passed will ensure that any new plans or executive orders that might be coming our way will not be enforced in Idaho. Then, once this method is established and shown to be effective, legislators can circle back and start doing the same for federal gun control already on the books. SB1332 is an important building block for protecting the 2nd Amendment in Idaho.”

Passage of the bill would represent a giant step forward in protecting the right to keep and bear arms in Idaho. As it stands now, state and local law enforcement will cooperate with all future firearms laws.

The bill rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce and federal act or program The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. US serves as the cornerstone.

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

Idaho has a chance to succeed where it did not last year, in limiting the feds’ ability to grab guns.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Politics, US

Tennessee legislators vote to nullify some federal roadside checkpoints

3 Comments

NASHVILLE, March 11, 2014– A bill which would nullify federal “voluntary” checkpoints in the Volunteer State State moved another step towards law today. Sen. Mike Bell filed Senate Bill 1485 in January (SB1485). It passed on Jan 27 unanimously by a 37-0 vote. And today, the House concurred by a vote of 91-0.

It reads, in part:

No state, county, municipal or metropolitan form of government law enforcement officer shall participate in, lend assistance to, or be present in any official capacity at any voluntary motor vehicle checkpoint or stop conducted by a private company or research group to collect a human sample from consenting motorists stopped at the checkpoint for research or statistical purposes.

The bill stipulates that the law will apply “whether the checkpoint is funded by federal grant or contract with a federal agency and regardless of whether the motorists consenting to a giving a human sample are compensated or not.”

Practically speaking, the bill would block roadblocks set up as part of a multimillion dollar federal study run by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation based in Maryland operates the checkpoints, run by uniformed officers. Officers offer motorists cash for DNA samples, generally $10 for a cheek-swab and $50 for blood. Officers reportedly up the ante for motorists who refuse, offering $100. Furthermore, officers have been reported to force motorists perform checkpoint activities even after total refusal.

The federal government lacks constitutional authority to fund or run such a study, and there is no legal or constitutional requirement for state or local law enforcement to help the federal government carry it out. This bill would nullify the effort in Tennessee.

The bill now moves to Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam’s desk for a signature.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Politics, US

South Carolina Democrats and Republicans push legislation to “nullify” NSA

1 Comment

COLUMBIA, March 11, 2014– The campaign to stop unconstitutional National Security Agency (NSA) spying at the state and local level has clearly taken on a life of its own, and is gaining support from across the political aisle.

A bipartisan group of 23 South Carolina representatives introduced the Fourth Amendment Protection Act late last month. Cosponsors include leadership from both parties, with Majority leader Rep. Bruce Bannister (R) and Minority leader Rep. J. Todd Rutherford (D) both signing on to the bill.

Introduced by Rep. Kris Crawford (R-Florence), H.4795 would bar South Carolina or its political subdivision from providing material support for, assisting with, or in any way participating in the collection of a person’s electronic data or metadata by a federal agency or pursuant to any federal law, rule, regulation, or order. The bill would also make any such data collected by the feds and shared with state or local law enforcement inadmissible in court.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey said that the provision dealing with data sharing would likely have the most immediate and far-reaching impact because it erases a practical effect of the NSA’s spy activities.

“We know the NSA shares warrantless data with state and local law enforcement. We know from a Reuters report that most of this shared data has absolutely nothing to do with national security issues,” he said. “This data sharing shoves a dagger into the heart of the Fourth Amendment. This bill would stop that from happening immediately.”

While the NSA does not currently operate a data or “threat operations” center in South Carolina, OffNow coalition spokesperson Shane Trejo said the Palmetto State, and others around the country, need to pass similar legislation to make NSA expansion more difficult.

“As we’ve seen over the last few yeas, the NSA is aggressively expanding in Utah, Texas, Hawaii and other states too,” he said.  “Obviously, the NSA keeps its plans close to the vest. That’s why we can’t just address where it is today, but we have to work to get the entire country to pull up the welcome mat and say, ‘We don’t want you here if you refuse to work within constitutional restraints.”

The legislation sits on well-established legal principle known as anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot “commandeer” or coerce states into implementing or enforcing federal acts or regulations – constitutional or not. The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. The 1997 case, Printz v. US, serves as the modern cornerstone. The majority opinion deemed commandeering “incompatible with our constitutional system.”

H4795 will first be heard in the house judiciary committee, where seven of the 24 committee members are bill cosponsors. But, inside sources suggest that it will still take significant support to move the bill out of Chairman Greg Delleney’s committee. Should it pass, it will then be considered by the full house.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

 

Politics, US

BREAKING: Oklahoma legislators vote to nullify Agenda 21

23 Comments

OKLAHOMA CITY, Mar. 4, 2014 – A bill that would nullify Agenda 21 in Oklahoma passed through the state house today.

“This bill protects your private property from being acquired by eminent domain from without a public vote or public hearing,” said bill sponsor, Rep. Lewis Moore.

HB2807, known as the “Oklahoma Community Protection Act,” would prohibit any state agency or political subdivision from adopting or implementing “policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe upon or restrict private property rights without due process.”

It also would void any previous commitments which may have been made under Agenda 21 or a similar program.

It reads, “any debt or commitment to an international or federal entity whereby the citizens did not have the ability to exercise their constitutional rights shall be considered null and void.”

The bill passed by a vote of 66-26.

The United Nations passed Agenda 21 in 1992 at its Conference on Environmental and Development. The global initiative encompasses a wide range of programs meant to promote “sustainability.” It works its way into the U.S. system through a back door strategy, targeting local governments. Objections to Agenda 21 include violations  of personal property rights, the erosion of state and local authority, and  binding of the United States to international agreements contrary to the U.S. Constitution.

HB2805 now moves to the state senate, where it will first need to be passed by a committee before the full senate has an opportunity to concur.

The Tenth Amendment Center, a national think tank focused on reclaiming state power from the federal government, has been following the bill closely and working directly with legislators to ensure its success.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Politics, US

BREAKING: Georgia Legislators Vote To “Nullify” Obamacare

44 Comments

Georgia

ATLANTA, Mar. 4, 2014 – Yesterday, the Georgia state House of Representatives passed a bill which bans the state from participating in significant portions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). House Bill 707 (HB707), introduced by Rep. Jason Spencer, pushes back against the ACA in five ways. It passed the house in a late-night vote of 115-59.

According to Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin, “While Georgia can’t fully stop Obamacare on its own, it can serve as a pretty major roadblock to implementation,” he said. “And as more states get on board with this strategy, it will pull the rug out from under it. Bills like this will end Obamacare from the bottom up.”

Specifically, HB707:

1. Prohibits any state agencies, departments or political subdivisions from using resources or spending funds to advocate for the expansion of Medicaid. This provision works hand-in-hand with HB990 to make it more difficult to expand Medicaid. HB990 would require legislative approval for expansion of the program, barring the governor from doing it by executive order.

2. Prohibits the state of Georgia from running an insurance exchange.

3. Refuses and federal grant money for the purpose of creating or running a state insurance exchange.

4. Ends the University of Georgia Health Navigator Program.

5. Prohibits the Commissioner of Insurance from investigating or enforcing any alleged violation of federal health insurance requirements mandated by Obamacare.

These provisions creates impediments to the implementation and execution of Obamacare in Georgia. We have seen the difficulties created by the number of states simply refusing to set up exchanges. The ACA was predicated on state cooperation. By refusing to help, passage of the bill puts the federal government in an almost impossible position. It never intended to run the healthcare system alone, and ultimately, it can’t do it without state help.

Judge Andrew Napolitano agreed recently, when pointing out that if a number of states were to refuse to participate with the ACA in a wholesale fashion, that multi-state action would “gut Obamacare.”

The provision prohibiting the Georgia insurance commissioner from investigating or enforcing violations of federally mandated health insurance requirements will prove particularly problematic for the feds.

Insurance commissioners serve as the enforcement arm for insurance regulation in the states. The federal government has no enforcement arm. It assumed the state insurance commissioners would enforce all of the provisions of the ACA. So, when people have issues with their mandated coverage, they will have to call the feds.

At this point, it remains unclear who they will even call. Issues the Georgia insurance commissioner will not address include prohibiting a denial of insurance for preexisting conditions, requiring dependent coverage for children up to age 26, and proscribing lifetime or yearly dollar limits on coverage of essential health benefits.

“Disputes over these mandates arise under federal, not state law,” HB707 sponsor Rep. Jason Spencer said. “The federal Department of Health and Human Services can be expected to seek to commandeer the machinery of Georgia’s commissioner of insurance to enforce them or to investigate alleged violations because at present there is no federal health insurance agency and Congress is not likely to create one given the substantial opposition to Obamacare.

Under HB707, the feds won’t be able to do that. They’ll have to figure out how to do it themselves.

This provision stands on solid legal ground under the anti-commandeering doctrine. It rests primarily on four SCOTUS cases: Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842), New York v. US (1992), Printz v. US (1997) and National Federation of Businesses v. Sebelius. (2012) The Printz case serves the cornerstone. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia asserted that commandeering is incompatible would the constitutional system.

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Politics, US

BREAKING: Missouri Legislators Vote To Nullify All Federal Gun Control Laws

44 Comments
MOs
Missouri State Senate Chamber

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo., February 21, 2014– A Missouri bill which seeks to nullify virtually every federal gun control measure on the books, “whether past, present or future,” passed the Senate Thursday. SB613 would ban the state from enforcing virtually all federal gun control measures, and includes criminal charges for federal agents attempting to violate the right to keep and bear arms in Missouri.

The measure passed 23-10.

SB613 counts as what could be the strongest defense against federal encroachments on the right to keep an bear arms ever considered at the state level. It reads, in part:

All federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States I and Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

Federal acts which would be considered “null and void and of no effect” include, but are not limited to:

(a) Any tax, levy, fee, or stamp imposed on firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition not common to all other goods and services which might reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;

(b) Any registering or tracking of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which might reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;

(c) Any registering or tracking of the owners of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition which might reasonably be expected to create a chilling effect on the purchase or ownership of those items by law-abiding citizens;

(d) Any act forbidding the possession, ownership, or use or transfer of a firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition by law-abiding citizens; and

(e) Any act ordering the confiscation of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition from law-abiding citizens

The legislation specifically bans all state employees from enforcing or attempting to enforce any acts running counter to the proposed law. Such a tactic is an extremely effective way to stop a federal government busting at the seams. Even the National Governors Association admitted the same recently when they sent out a press release noting that “States are partners with the federal government in implementing most federal programs.”

That means states can create impediments to enforcing and implementing “most federal programs.”  On federal gun control measures, Judge Andrew Napolitano suggested that a single state standing down would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible to enforce” within that state.

James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” advised this very tactic.  Madison supplied the blueprint for resisting federal power in Federalist 46. He outlined several steps that states can take to effective stop “an unwarrantable measure,” or “even a warrantable measure” of the federal government. Madison called for “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” as a way to successfully thwart federal acts.

SB613 now moves on to the state House, where it will first need to pass out of committee before the full House can consider it.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter.

Politics, US

Could New Arizona Legislation Nullify All Federal Gun Laws?

23 Comments

capit

PHOENIX, February 3, 2014– The campaign to stop federal violations of the Second Amendment at the state and local level got two big boosts late last week with the introduction of the Second Amendment Preservation Act in Arizona and an important endorsement for a similar bill pending in Florida.

Along with eight other sponsors, Arizona state Senator Kelli Ward introduced the Second Amendment Preservation Act in the Grand Canyon State. SB1294 prohibits the state from enforcing “any federal act, law, order, rule or regulation that relates to a personal firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition within the limits of this state.”

“We’ve sat back and allowed the federal government to trample the Constitution long enough,” Ward said. “We’re going to pass this bill and stop the state of Arizona from helping the feds violate your rights.”

The legislation rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot “commandeer” or coerce states into implementing or enforcing federal acts or regulations – constitutional or not. The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. The 1997 case, Printz v. US, serves as the modern cornerstone.

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

Such a tactic is an extremely effective way to stop a federal government busting at the seams. Even the National Governors Association admitted this recently when it sent out a press release noting that “States are partners with the federal government in implementing most federal programs.” That means states can create impediments to enforcing and implementing “most federal programs,” including those which impose upon the right to keep and bear arms.

James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” advised this very tactic.  Madison supplied the blueprint for resisting federal power in Federalist 46. He outlined several steps that states can take to effective stop “an unwarrantable measure,” or “even a warrantable measure” of the federal government. Anticipating the anti-commandeering doctrine, Madison called for “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” as a method of resistance.

Judge Andrew Napolitano last year urged states to introduce and pass this type of legislation specifically, saying that a single state passing such a law would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible to enforce.”

It’s quite simple; you cannot say you support the Second Amendment and oppose this bill.

Arizona Tenth Amendment Center state chapter coordinator Adam Henriksen agreed.

“Guns and Ammo magazine ranked Arizona number one for gun rights, giving our state a score of 49 out of a possible 50 points. Our legislators know that we won’t let our rights be trampled on,” he said.

Last week, Rep. Dane Eagle (R-Cape Coral) introduced HB733 in the Florida House. Similar to the Arizona bill, it would also bar the state from assisting federal agents in the enforcement of federal firearms laws and from providing material support of any kind to federal agents in the enforcement of these laws.

On Friday, HB733 picked up the endorsement of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. Sheriff Richard Mack founded CSPOA, and he was one of the plaintiffs in the Printz case.

Mack said his organization supports the Florida Second Amendment Preservation Act, and would like to see every state take this path.

“This bill is one more needed action in the growing movement to return the powers not expressly given to the federal government back to the States and the People, according to the Constitution. We are in league with this legislation, and we encourage every state to enact similar laws”, said Sheriff Richard Mack (Ret.), founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (cspoa.org). CSPOA is in the process of communicating it’s support to legislatures around the country, according to Rick Dalton, CSPOA legislative liaison. “Our members are on the front lines and this kind of law will aid us in standing firm in defense of the rights of the people we serve”, said Sheriff Mack.

CSPOA just held a conference last week where all those present signed a resolution putting the federal government on notice that lawless and unconstitutional federal activities will not be tolerated where its members have jurisdiction, and such activities will be treated as criminal acts.

Florida Tenth Amendment Center state coordinator Andrew Nappi considered this a major step forward.

“This is a substantial attempt to push back against federal actions violating the Second Amendment. Representative Eagle has set an example for others who say they support the Second Amendment, but stop short of taking action.” said Nappi. “But as the CSPOA resolution makes clear, the time for inaction is over.”

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter: @MichaelLotfi

Politics, US

Vermont becomes twelfth state to introduce legislation to banish NSA

4 Comments

mont

MONTPELIER, Feburary 3, 2014 –Vermont is now the 12th state with legislation to take on NSA spying.

Last Tuesday, Rep. Teo Zagar (D-Windsor-4-1), along with co-sponsor Reps. Susan Davis (P/D-Orange-1), Patricia Komline (R-Bennington-Rutland) and William Stevens (I-Addison-Rutland) introduced the Fourth Amendment Protection Act to prohibit any state support of the NSA.

Based on model legislation drafted by the OffNow coalition, House Bill 732 (H732) would make it state policy to “refuse to provide material support for or assist or in any way participate in the collection of a person’s electronic data or metadata by any federal agency or pursuant to any federal law, rule, regulation, or order unless the data is collected pursuant to a warrant that particularly describes the persons, places, and things to be searched or seized.”

Practically speaking, the Vermont bill addresses two areas where the NSA relies on state assistance to continue their programs.

It would ban the state from using information collected without warrant by any federal agency in criminal investigations or prosecutions.

As Reuters reported in August, 2013, the secretive Special Operations Division (SOD) is “funneling information from intelligence intercepts, wiretaps, informants and a massive database of telephone records to authorities across the nation to help them launch criminal investigations of Americans.”

Documents obtained by Reuters show that these cases “rarely involve national security issues,” and that local law enforcement is directed by SOD to “conceal how such investigations truly begin.”

Shane Trejo of the OffNow coalition suggested that this was the most important part of the legislation. “While state actions might not be able to physically stop the NSA from collecting our data without a warrant, legislation such as this can significantly reduce the practical effect of what they are trying to do with it, namely, use it in the states for non-terror criminal cases, such as prosecuting the war on cannabis,” he said.


(Video from OffNow.org)

The bill would also ban the state of Vermont from providing any resources, including water or electricity, which aids any federal agency in the collection of electronic data or metadata without a “judicially-issued warrant that particularly describes the persons, places, and things to be searched or seized.”

While the NSA does not have a physical facility in Vermont, the legislation addresses “any federal agency,” which brings many others under the proposed ban on state cooperation.

Reports in the Washington Post and USA Today last fall documented how “the FBI and most other investigative bodies in the federal government” are regularly using a mobile device known as a “stingray” to intercept and collect electronic data without a warrant. Local and state police “have access through sharing agreements.”

In a statement on his website, Zagar, an under-40 part-time citizen legislator, said one of his goals for 2014 was to “work with fellow representatives from across the state and across the aisles to try to improve the state of our state.”

By working with cosponsors identified as democrat, progressive democrat, republican and independent, Shahid Buttar of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee noted that Zagar’s bill was part of a growing effort nationally to cross political boundaries to resist mass surveillance. “We look forward to building transpartisan grassroots campaigns, both online and off-line, in states around the country to secure fundamental First and Fourth amendment rights violated en masse by the NSA,” said Buttar.

Mike Maharrey of the Tenth Amendment Center agreed. “This crosses party lines. Left, right and even the generally apathetic are outraged that their government is spying on them day in and day out,” he said. “Violations of our basic civil liberties impacts us all -Democrats, Republicans and independents alike. For all of our political bickering, Americans rally around certain core principles enshrined in our Constitution. It’s fitting that these four legislators are standing together to defend these values.”

HB732 has been referred to the Vermont House Judiciary Committee where it will need to be passed by a majority vote before being considered by the full state house.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter: @MichaelLotfi

Politics, US

BREAKING: Tennessee files historic legislation; Takes aim at state’s NSA facility

61 Comments

NASHVILLE, January 22, 2014–  As eight states have introduced legislation to keep the NSA out of their borders, Tennessee’s newly introduced legislation packs the strongest punch yet.

The bill is known as the “Tennessee Fourth Amendment Protection Act”. State Senator Stacey Campfield (R) and State Representative Andy Holt (R) are the Senate and House sponsors. The bill was drafted and lobbied for by the Tenth Amendment Center, a national think-tank, which seeks to impede unconstitutional federal laws, regulations and entities on the state level.

“We have an out of control federal agency spying on pretty much everybody in the world. I don’t think the state of Tennessee should be helping the NSA violate the Constitution and the basic privacy rights of its citizens – and we don’t have to,” Campfield said. “This bill may not stop the NSA, but it will darn sure stop Tennessee from participating in unjustified and illegal activities.”

Campfield’s comments hold strong warrant. The NSA has been operating directly underneath the nose of many Tennesseans without them ever knowing. A long-standing secretive NSA computing facility calls Oak Ridge, Tennessee home. According to NSA researcher James Bamford, the NSA runs most data it gathers “from code breaking to word captures,” through computers at it’s facility in Oak Ridge.

The Tennessee Fourth Amendment Protection Act (Senate Bill 1849) will impede the NSA by “refusing material support, participation, or assistance, to any federal agency which claims the power, or with any federal law, rule, regulation, or order which purports to authorize the collection of  electronic data or metadata of any person pursuant to any action not based on a warrant that particularly describes the person, place and thing to be searched and seized.

From a practical standpoint, the legislation covers four major areas.

• Prohibits state and local agencies from providing any material support to the NSA within their jurisdiction. Includes barring government-owned utilities from providing water and electricity.

• Makes information gathered without a warrant by the NSA and shared with law enforcement inadmissible in state court.

• Blocks public universities from serving as NSA research facilities or recruiting grounds.

• Disincentivizes corporations attempting to fill needs not met in the absence of state cooperation.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey provided the following statement:

“When Sen. Ward in Arizona announced a few weeks back that she planned to introduce the Fourth Amendment Protection Act, it was a novelty. People had this attitude like, ‘Oh, that’s cute. But it will never amount to anything.’ Today Tennessee makes the eighth state considering action to refuse cooperation with the NSA, including two states with physical facilities within their borders. And mark my words – more are coming. Big ones,” said Maharrey.

“James Madison said several states refusing to cooperate with officers of the union would create obstructions the federal government would not be willing to encounter. As more states get involved in this campaign, it it will create obstructions. This is not symbolic. We intend to make the NSA stop violating the Constitution.”

The Multiprogram Research Facility (MRF) sits discreetly on the East Campus of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Inside this top secret facility, NSA researchers work to build High Productivity Computers. The goal: make machines fast enough to crack encryption.

Numerous sources report the MRF will work in tandem with the data storage center in Bluffdale, Utah. The super-fast computers in Oak Ridge could conceivably break the encryption on reams of data stored in Utah, making its contents accessible to the NSA. This includes data of Americans vacuumed up by the spy agency.

A partnership between the University of Tennessee and Battelle runs the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. UT-Battelle’s contract ends in 2015, but the DOE has already declared its intent and started the process to extend it. That process will take some time and the proposed legislation could stop it.

Many co-sponsors of the Act have come forward to show their support for the legislation including State Rep. Courtney Rodgers (R), Rep. Tilman Goins (R), Rep. Sheila Butt (R), Rep. Terri Weaver (R), Rep. Jeremy Fasion (R) and Senator Mae Beavers (R). No Democrats have signed on as sponsors yet.

State Rep. Joe Carr (R) signed on as a co-sponsor to the Act this morning. Carr is Tea Party candidate currently running a campaign to unseat US Senator Lamar Alexander (R).

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook & on Twitter: @MichaelLotfi

Politics, US

New West Virginia legislation would nullify federal gun laws

8 Comments

state h

CHARLESTON, W.V., January 21, 2014 –  West Virginia legislator Cindy Frich (R), and five cosponsors have introduced a bill, which would impede the implementation of federal gun control measures, within the state.

House Bill 2832 (HB2832), the “Firearm Protection Act”, explicitly prohibits all state public servants from enforcing any “act, law, statute, rule or regulation of the United States Government relating to a personal firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition” provided that the item in question remains “exclusively within the borders of West Virginia.”

From the text of HB2832:

“The purpose of this bill is to create the “Firearm Protection Act” that provides that any federal law effective after March 1, 2013 which attempts to ban semiautomatic firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on firearms in this state is unenforceable in West Virginia.”

The bill’s legal standing is based upon anti-commandeering doctrine and stands with 170 years of Supreme Court jurisprudence.

The Supreme Court has upheld this doctrine repeatedly from 1842 to 2012. “There is absolutely no serious discussion opposing anti-commandeering,” said Mike Maharrey, national communications director for the Tenth Amendment Center.  “On top of it,” he continued, “This is just what James Madison advised the people and states to do if they wanted to thwart federal acts.”

Writing in Federalist #46, Madison advised a series of actions which he said would be an effective way to stop both unconstitutional and constitutional federal acts. He referred to them as either “warrantable” or “unpopular.”

These actions included using state “legislative devices” and a “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union.”

“The federal government simply does not have the manpower or resources to enforce the countless laws they have on the books,” said Maharrey. “All one needs for proof is the miserable failure that the Obama administration has experienced while trying harder than any president in history to stop states rights on marijuana. After a while, they had to throw in the towel.”

In order to move further, HB2832 currently sits in the House Judiciary Committee where it must be passed by a majority vote before going to the House floor for further consideration. A state Senate companion bill must also be voted on before the bill becomes state law.

One may follow the Tenth Amendment Center to track the progress of HB2832.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook & on Twitter: @MichaelLotfi

 

Politics, US

West Virginia moves to nullify federal hemp ban

4 Comments

state hIf passed, HB3011 would effectively nullify the federal ban on hemp cultivation. The West Virginia House joins many other states who are seeking to nullify the federal ban this legislative season.

H.B. 3011 has strong bipartisan support. The bill was introduced by Rep. Mike Manypenny (D), with Reps. Walker (D), Swartzmiller (D), Canterbury (R) and Ambler (R) signed on as co-sponsors.

The bill would allow for farmers to apply for state permits that allow cultivation of industrial hemp.

The preamble of the bill is stated as to allow the state to “remove the provision that requires an applicant to meet federal requirements concerning the production, distribution and sale of industrial hemp prior to being licensed to grow hemp for industrial purposes in the state.”

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook & on Twitter: @MichaelLotfi

Politics, US

Obamacare falling apart at the seams: Indiana moves to nullify healthcare law

21 Comments

Indiana State House (Indianapolis, Indiana)

The state legislatures of Oklahoma, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee and now Indiana have all taken steps to nullify the federal healthcare law.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey said that this could create a formidable bloc, pulling the rug out from under the already flailing federal act. “If five states pass something like this, they’re going to be paying attention,” he said. “And if ten or fifteen do it? It’s game over for Obamacare.”

Indiana state Rep. Timothy Harman (R) along with two co-authors have introduced legislation which would virtually nullify Obamcare within the state of Indiana if passed.

The bills legal argument is rooted in anti-commandeering doctrine, which has been established by multiple Supreme Court cases, including Printz vs. United States. This doctrine states that the federal government cannot force or coerce states into carrying out federal law, regulations or programs.

House Bill 1406 (HB1406) would make it so that “an agency, officer, or employee of the state shall not…”engage in an activity that aids any person in the enforcement of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”

The legislation would also ban the state and its political subdivisions from establishing or participating in a health care exchange under the federal act.

HB1406 has been transferred to the House Ways and Means committee. Here it will need to be passed by a majority vote before being considered by the full Indiana House.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook and on Twitter @MichaelLotfi

 

Politics, US

Will New Bill Nullify Federal Gun Laws In Tennessee? Legislators Make The Move

5 Comments

TNCAPNASHVILLE, Janurary 16, 2014– An expansion of the 2009 Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act was introduced yesterday by Senator Mae Beavers (SB1607). The bill is designed to protect citizens of Tennessee against federal violations of the 2nd Amendment and 10th Amendment restrictions on Congress.

“Any elected official in Tennessee who works against this bill is frankly siding with President Obama on gun control” Tennessee Firearms Association Executive Director John Harris notes. “If you don’t vote to protect your own citizens and state from Obama’s liberal gun-grabbing agenda, then you are effectively supporting his gun control scheme and the intentional destruction of the Bill of Rights”.

The 2014 Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act legislation declares that the States expressly prohibits the federal government from having any regulatory authority over firearms in Tennessee based on the 2nd and 10th Amendments in the Bill of Rights.   As a result no federal firearms laws in Tennessee are valid.  The first provision of the bill will mandate criminal penalties for any federal or state official attempting to enforce unconstitutional federal firearms laws within the borders of Tennessee. The second provision empowers citizens to pursue claims by defining federal firearms laws as intentional civil rights violations.

The Tennessee Firearms Association worked closely with Senator Beavers, Tenth Amendment Center specialists and constitutional law experts in crafting this legislation. A House sponsor will be announced in coming days.

Follow Michael Lotfi on Facebook & On Twitter: @MichaelLotfi