The New York Times published on September 3, 2013 and article written by Robert Levy, chairman of the Cato Institute, on the “Limitations of Nullification”. I have had the honor of having personal discussions with Mr. Levy on several issues and even had the opportunity to debate him on the issue of nullification in a forum in South Florida. It will be no surprise to Mr. Levy that I disagree with his opinion. Opinions aside, I would like to have the opportunity to present the facts.
Mr. Levy’s main premise is that the States have the option to not agree and not enforce federal law, but they do not have the ability to prevent the federal government from enforcing its laws within the States.
“That’s because federal officials are authorized to enforce their own laws, even if they cannot compel the states to do so. Thus, on the second point, the nullifiers are wrong: states cannot impede federal enforcement of a federal law merely because the state deems it unconstitutional. That is up to the federal courts.”
Mr. Levy’s premise is flawed and a mere review of the facts makes that clear. This country was built upon the foundation of free, independent, and sovereign States.
“Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States...” Lee Resolution June 7, 1776
“We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled,…solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.” Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776 (emphasis added)
More @ Kris Anne Hall
Thanks Brock.
ReplyDeleteExactly right, the 50 STATES, created that monster, and they could shut it down...
The constitution allows the states themselves to call for a 'states convention', not a concon, for the purpose of amendments... like eliminating whole swathes of FedGov.
This movement has started.
conventionofstates.com/
If nothing else, the sheer entertainment value alone would be worth seeing them pull it off...
as the Federal Troops surround the 'illegal convention' and the conventioneers have the Militias of the several STATES as convention security...
;)
the 50 STATES, created that monster, and they could shut it down..
ReplyDeletePlease, let us do it.:)
How many platoons does the Cato Institute field, again?
ReplyDelete:) Not 1, I am sure.
DeleteIt's funny how the guberment goons and groupies and enforcers think that they have the explicit right to tell the states and it's people that they are not legally independent. They treat The US Constitution as if it was only a symbolic document.. like liberals
ReplyDeleteWonder if there is a virus that only affects liberals.......?:)
Delete