Tuesday, March 01, 2011

Pick One

Pick One,
or both is okay.

Who else brings you so much happiness and information simultaneously?  Hmmmm?  You're welcome.

8 comments:

Paul D said...

Federal law nullification. I think I'm getting a woody.

(oh, and the woman might be fun as well)

DougM said...

I'll take the *clank* one, Rodge. Thanks for the choice, anyway.
The Federal gov't was created by the States with a stroke of a pen, not by God or nature. It has no legitimate existence outside its constitutional contract. When it fails to perform its duties or exceeds its constitutionally authorized powers, the States who created it and are parties to that contract are fully justified in correcting any breach of contract or ignoring any act or entity that acts without constitutional authorization.
Dismissing the Constitution is illegitimate, dictatorial, and a threat to the Republic.

Chuck Martel said...

S.C. legislators are introducing a bill that would allow incandescent light bulbs manufactured and sold within S.C. to be exempt from federal laws and regulations. That would (supposedly) enable South Carolinians to get around the Commerce Clause that otherwise allows the feds to ban incandescents and mandate the use of florescent bulbs.

I think they are still going to have a little bit of problem w/ the 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case of Wickard v. Filburn.

Rodger the Real King of France said...

Thanks Chuck, Wickard_v._Filburnth is an early example of activist courts being Commerce Clause activist. And what a cast of All-Stars they were.

Harlan F. Stone, Owen J. Roberts · Hugo Black · Stanley F. Reed · Felix Frankfurter · William O. Douglas · Frank Murphy · James F. Byrnes · Robert H. Jackson

Nullify every damned thing they did.

clem said...

Montana's nullification proposals failed the day after the above article was written. Idaho's failed, too.

Not surprisingly, the issue has become partisan. The left's strategy is to cry racism and compare nullifiers to the Confederacy.

In Arizona, Pima County has threatened to secede from the state if nullification passes.

Anonymous said...

SCOTUS and the general legal community place a high value on precedent. Wickard v. Filburn nullified about 152 years of precedent. Why can't we nullify a mere 69 years of Wickard v. Filburn precedent?
Lt. Col. Gen. Tailgunner dick

Rodger the Real King of France said...

I would let Pima County secede, and assess to it 90% of the the state's federal debt obligation. Then I'd declare war on the state of Pima, hang the leaders and confiscate all it's property. I'm not kidding.

Anonymous said...

Tennessee bill would make following Shariah a felony.

Bravo!

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.