A new Utah Bill sets up a process for the state to overrule or ignore federal rules and decisions. I post a musical tribute below. Can you guess it? And think about the constitutionality.
Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act
Please consider the Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act.
- Establishes a framework for the Legislature, by concurrent resolution, to prohibit the enforcement of a federal directive within the state by government officers if the Legislature determines the federal directive violates the principles of state sovereignty;
- Describes the ways in which a federal directive violates the principles of state sovereignty; Limits the authority for requesting a concurrent resolution under the bill;
- Requires the Legislature to consult with the attorney general regarding the potential impact of a concurrent resolution on litigation and to provide notice to representatives of tribal governments;
How to Overrule the Federal Government
CNN reports Utah’s New ‘Sovereignty Act’ Sets Up a Process to Overrule the Federal Government.
The Utah bill, introduced as the “Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act,” was signed into law by Gov. Spencer Cox on January 31.
For its supporters, the law is another method of standing up to the federal government.
“Balancing power between state and federal sovereignty is an essential part of our constitutional system,” Gov. Cox said in a statement. “This legislation gives us another way to push back on federal overreach and maintain that balance.”
Yet the push may stand in conflict with the US Constitution’s “Supremacy Clause,” which states federal laws take precedence over state ones. Robert Keiter, a law professor at the University of Utah’s SJ Quinney College of Law, said he was skeptical the Sovereignty Act was constitutional.
“This sends the message, and the Utah legislature is famous for sending messages of this sort, that it’s unhappy with the federal government. (And it’s) expressing that in a way that is constitutionally problematic,” he told CNN.
Utah Sen. Scott Sandall, who sponsored the Sovereignty Act, said he hoped the bill spreads to other states.
“I think any state should be looking at adopting this,” he told CNN in an interview. “Don’t you want a real organized way in your state to vet these things and look and say where the federal government is overreaching? No matter which party or which ideology you espouse, this could be helpful in any state, in my opinion.”
“Our attorneys have indicated to me that the process that’s in place is constitutional,” he said. “It doesn’t have a constitutional (issue) simply because it’s a process. Any kind of resolution may or may not be deemed constitutional.”
Yet he had certain policies in mind. In particular, he mentioned a dispute with the Environmental Protection Agency’s “good neighbor” rule, a regulation to cut down on smog and air pollution crossing state lines.
Utah has also been in a fight with the federal government over control of public lands regarding three national monuments, namely Bears Ears, Grand Staircase-Escalante, and Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine. And as a heavily Republican state, the legislature has taken up national partisan positions, such as opposition to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs.
Musical Tribute
It’s your thing, do what you wanna do
I can’t tell you, who to sock it to
Constitutional?
I believe the answer depends on what you mean by the question “Is the Bill Constitutional?”
The process itself seems constitutional. But if the Supreme Court decides the Federal government has sovereignty, well guess what.
Texas Showdown, Supreme Court Lets Feds Cut Abbott’s Razor Wire
On January 22, I commented Texas Showdown, Supreme Court Lets Feds Cut Abbott’s Razor Wire
In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court sided with the Biden Administration. Federal authorities will cut the razor wire and open the illegal immigration floodgates.
Effectively, the Utah law does nothing. Utah can choose to file a case against the Federal government, ignore Federal laws, etc.
But as with Texas, the US Supreme Court will decide. The same thing happened with a number of states attempting to keep Trump off the ballot.
Trump Disqualified From Ballot in Colorado
On December 19, I noted Trump Disqualified From 2024 Colorado Ballot, Supreme Court Challenge Coming
States have a right, albeit a foolish one, to attempt to disqualify Trump. But it’s foolish to think they will succeed.
Expect a Supreme Court Ruling Favor of Trump
On February 10, I commented Expect a Supreme Court Ruling 9-0 or 8-1 in Favor of Trump, Then What?
I expect good news for Trump next week, likely a unanimous ruling, on narrow grounds. Then what? That’s a very different subject. Trump has huge legal problems as I explain.
We still do not have a ruling, but there is no doubt which way it will roll.
Utah sent a signal that it may go for these kinds of cases. The surprising thing is how close the Texas case was.
But the bill passed by Utah does nothing in and of itself.
Utah has no rights to do anything it did not already have before, and that is ability to challenge the constitutionality of Federal mandates and Biden regulations.
Thus the bill is constitutional, but it does nothing in and of itself.
It’s a symbolic measure.
The Supremacy Clause in no way asserts that federal law supersedes State law–and vice versa. A careful reading of Art VI makes that very clear. If the framers in 1787 had championed the idea that fed law supersedes state law, not one state would have ratified the Constitution. The foundational principle we must look to is “state-federal dual sovereignty”which was the intention of the framers. That means that the federal government is granted specific enumerated powers (See Art I Sec 8) and that all other powers not expressly denied the states or, of course, specifically granted to the federal government in the Constitution reside with the individual states. Neither the feds or the states can usurp each other’s powers. The key words in Art VI is “in pursuance thereof”. Also, for a clearer understanding, see the 10th Amendment. Not rocket science.
“The power which the states gave to the central government, they can take back. They can even nullify!”
-Judge Andrew Napolitano
The Supreme court is a partisan hack and everyone knows it. States are taking back authority from the feds. Abbott is ignoring the SC ruling. Is this the beginning of the end for the “United” states?
Federal laws take precedence over state laws when and ONLY when the state law clashes with the enumerated powers. These are the powers the (superior) state governments granted to the (inferior) federal government when the states created the federal gov and gave it *ONLY* specific, enumerated powers to do stuff FOR the states.
All powers NOT delegated, “Reserved powers” are in the jurisdiction of the states, per the Tenth Amendment. If the federal gov always and forever could legislate on anything it wanted, we would have an authoritarian government of unlimited powers, decidedly NOT what the states created in 1789.
OBTW, whenever the Feds legislate outside of their enumerated powers, they are usurping – unconstitutionally and in violation of 10A – state authority. Example: “General Police Powers” are NOT delegated, but reserved. Hence, federal police agencies – FBI, ATF – are 10A violations and unconstitutional usurpation of state authority. What else do the Feds do in violation of their delegated authority? Foreign aid.
None of this would be necessary but for the 17th Amendment. Direct appointment of Senators gave the states a voice in what the federal government could require of, or impose upon, the nominally-sovereign States that make up the Union. The 17th Amendment disabled this check-and-balance between the popular will of the House and the prerogatives of the States (which the States were meant to defend in the Senate), while simultaneously making the bicameral legislature nearly completely superfluous. (The only time it has any real effect is when the two chambers are controlled by opposing parties. Otherwise, they do nothing but rubber-stamp each other’s legislation.)
Solution: Repeal the 17th Amendment.
Utahans may talk a good game; and live in the mountains; but they ain’t no Afghans.
Back when: Even their leading “prophets” bent over and revised their prophecies, rather than offend Big Massa in DC just as the latter starting degenerating into a progressive, meddling band of thugs.
Sovereignty and Constitutionality depend upon the authority upon which a federal law is built. The Federal Government cannot declare supremacy over a subject that it has not been given SPECIFIC authority in the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment draws a red line between the authority of the State and the Federal Authority. The Tenth gives legitimacy to a state’s determination that the Federal Government has exceeded its authority. Unless the Constitution gives SPECIFIC authority to a Federal Government Entity over a subject, then by default it MUST fall to the State under the Tenth Amendment.
Gun “Regulations” fall under this category. The Second Amendment specifically states “Shall not be infringed” and that draws a red line between the authority of the Federal Government and the authority of the states.
Exactly. SCOTUS narrowly affirmed that FedGov could cut border razor wire erected by Texas under some circumstances, since national border enforcement is delegated to FedGov, and therefore that practice does not conflict with the 10thA. It did not even forbid Texas to replace cut wire, or make additional wire installations, even though Shedlock for some reason seems to be implying that it did. There are innumerable examples of FedGov plainly exceeding its Constitutional authority that have yet to be adjudicated by the Supreme Court. Utah would be doing those of us who still believe that the Constitution is binding law a really big favor by contesting some of those unauthorized activities in order to get rulings, while there is a relatively conservative majority on the Court.
Yeah, well, the Taney court made a major decision in 1857, called Dred Scott: how’d that turn out? As I recall, none of those judges were impeached.
Well the Federal government is organized crime at this point, so there’s that
The states created the federal government, not the other way around. After the revolution, the states could have gone their separate ways to become individual countries. The Constitution limited what the federal government was allowed to do. The Bill of Rights limited the federal government even more.
The country started out decentralized, but has become more and more centralized over time, with national public health agencies interfering in a doctor’s medical treatment of a patient, because they have an agenda detrimental to the patient.
If the federal government won’t defend the border of Texas because they have an agenda detrimental to Texans, Texas has the right to defend their border, to protect their people. The people of Texas have the right to protect themselves. In such cases the federal government has nullified itself, just as the colonists nullified the British government with their declaration of independence. In Washington DC we have monuments to nullifiers. Even jurors have the right to nullify the law, in a corrupt prosecution.
I completely agree with your post. Many people do not know what you say in your post. The Federal Government has gotten way to intrusive.
The biggest mistake made by the Framers was not to include a process for orderly secession by a state. That would have saved a lot of trouble (and lives) and, imo, have made for a better nation.
By not making secession unconstitutionsl, of course the z founders agreed it WAS and IS Constitutional. The tyrant Lincoln abused authority enormously, turning on its head the entire construction of America.
Why is this any different that sanctuary states and cities?
The elephant in the room is that much of what the Federal Government does is Unconstitutional. The powers given to the Federal government are very specific and limited.as defined in the Constitution. The 10th Amendment says that any power not given or prohibited in the Constitution are reserved for the States. Thus, the bill is just a reaffirmation of the powers they already have. As to the Supremes they have helped the Federal government perform power grabs by wild interpretations of the interstate commerce clause. This was especially agregious in the FDR administration. FDR was a horrible president and someone should have pushed him and his wheelchair down the steps of the Capital building IMHO.
Amendment XThe powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
At that time, state governments were very much directly accountable to their citizens. Unfortunately, today, bureaucratic state government rule is in most cases just as remote and unresponsive to the people as is Fedgov.
Surely the smart thing to do would be for Utah to just throw as many conditionalities as possible up until the limits of the Supremacy Act, to slow down and stifle any policy they don’t like so that it takes years and years to implement?
One of Putin’s most regularly attempted intel ops to undermine the U.S. has been to encourage states to secede via social media & internet rumor mongering – propaganda.
They’ve attempted it repeatedly in Texas, Florida and California, I see this, and many of the commentors below, as more of the same, many of this forum’s commentors are non-American, some even openly pro-Putin..
As a result, most political commentary in online forums is nothing more than porta-potty graffiti now.
Russian intelligence has rendered anonymous internet thoroughly non-credible, not that it had much cred before,
Zerohedge has predicted the fall of western civilization almost daily for over a decade, but they deny Russian influence, despite it’s founder’s family ties to the old KGB.
We’re still here.
It’s a broken record, skipping endlessly, Jan 6th was the height of the stupidity, it’s dying off now.
“Civl war”….”Dems are taking your guns”….”Deep state”….”Dems giving Free money for illegal immigrants” …..”Death panels”…blah…blah…blah
Seriously do we really need Russia to tell us to tell the federal govt to go get stuffed? Get real man.
Yes, in some circles, the useful idiots are duped into being their namesake when comparing the US to most of the ROW at this time.
$100 billion more for Ukraine, man. We’re with you!
Also gone is the credibility of US PBS (Newshour especiallly). Deutsch Welle, and the BBC – and CBS/NBC/ABC/Fox.
When a majority shares a similar view, it’s generally referred to as “Democracy”.
Those who don’t share the same view are easily convinced they were cheated.
You’re saying that ALL mainstream news is propaganda, maybe consider another possibility.
.
There isn’t another possibility. They all parroted the government’s Covid propaganda.
First of all there is no Mainstream Media. The Majority Media is so far left of the American main stream they can’t even see the main stream from where thay are at. And use a better example. Example:
The Majority Media helped Clinton trick Americans into thinking that the money he transfered out of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds and then spent, was really his Budget Surplus. This is even though the US Treasury reported (in the fine print) that the US ran a deficit in each of the 8 years Clinton was in office.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on the luncheon entree. This nation was founded as a republic.
When a majority shares a similar view it is often called a mob.
When a plutocracy owns the media the editorial role may be suspect.
“Reds under the bed” is very McCarthyist… you are neo-McCarthyist trying to use a foreign bogeyman to explain way things are more easily explained by other things, like people just rejecting your worldview… Ockham’s Razor: you don’t need Putin.
link to youtube.com
Why not make the CCP your bogeyman? Or do you have list to work from, issued to you by your paymasters? Everything you say can be applied equally to your side.
That’s another Russian tactic, constantly redirecting angst toward China when Russia is mentioned.
Yes, we have issues with China, but Russia is the bigger problem, it doesn’t negate Russia’s ongoing propaganda efforts, it’s attempts to divide us.
.
I guess you haven’t been paying attention. Boys can now be girls, go in your daughter’s bathroom to rape her.and when the dad is outraged he’ll get arrested while the creep goes free. Thanks Joe Biden! 11 million illegal aliens have invaded our country, increasing criminality and are stressing an already over taxed social safety net. Thanks Joe Biden! The dumbass neocons which have started multiple murderous, expensive, and evil wars with no benefit to any (except the MIC and Israel) has started two new conflicts with JFB (Joe f@<%ing Biden). But some dumb, uneducated, moron sits on his duff all day long, stuffing cheese doodles into his face and spouting state propaganda and thinks he’s a genius. GFY!
Is this new law applicable in pizza shop basements?…Does it allow cannibalism too?
Thanks for letting us know you are not serious….
RE: Zerohedge/Fall of western Civilization. Do you not see the demise of western civilization over the past decade…really? It is incremental…not overnight. Do your homework and pay attention to history…there is a lot to learn by looking in the rear view mirror if you care where you are going.
Russia Russia Russia. It is a propaganda campaign. Haven’t read it, but Dr. Robert Malone wrote a book titled Lies My Government Told Me. He is an American. Why Frilton, is our government lying to us? Why does NDAA 2013 allow our government to propagandize to us? I can’t trust anything they say, as it is self serving propaganda.
Speaking of cred, the U.S. federal government doesn’t have any.
Rome didn’t fall in a day. It still declined and fell. The sun once never set on the British Empire. But not any more. The U.S. is heading the same direction, just as the U.S. was once the producer to the world and has given way to China. China will then lose it to somewhere else. It’s the way cycles work.
Horseshit.
Ridiculous.
My toilet is broken this morning, I suspect Putin and Russia are involved.
I would like to see if this is upheld. Then California could pass it when Trump is elected President.
Reminds me of the Articles of Confederation. That didn’t work out.
The Constitution is clear on both counts – States cannot over rule Federal government – Insurrectionists cannot run for office.
There was no insurrection… Russian Intelligence funded you to keep pretending that the obvious stroll through the White House is something that it isn’t. Your constitution does not have a definition that fits your target for your election interference.
States that were illegally annexed – such as the Kingdom of Hawai’i can overrule…
I agree that all officers of the Confederate armed forces of the Confederate States of America be disenfranchised. They have all been dead for over a hundred years anyway. Since then we have not had a rebellion although we have had a lot of riots but no organized rebellion.
I would have thought this to be pure nonsense. But that was before the sanctuary state / sanctuary city concept was applied to immigration, abortion and transgenderism. Still, I think that initiatives from the right will be struck down by SCOTUS and initiatives from the left will continue to be upheld.
Progressive overreach will lead to a John Brown Harper’s Ferry moment. History often shaped by unintended, unforeseen, consequences. Truck drivers refusing to deliver goods to large metro area, maybe.
Trucking companies permanently lose contracts, new companies replace them.
Capitalism’s great.
Depends how ugly it gets
I thought you were an anti-capitalist… supermarkets go bust with no produce.
No one cares about that dusty, old document. Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. Welcome to modern man.
Interesting comment coming from a Hamiltonian…
Hamiltonski.
Good one.
The Utah bill was inspired by the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act, passed in 2022 under Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. Our Canadian federal government is incompetent and dominated by left-wing ideologues obsessed with climate change and environmental policies. They are also prone to constitutional overreach in their fervour to shut down Alberta’s energy complex. Our Premier wanted a tool to pre-empt compliance with federal regulations they deemed unconstitutional.
All powers not specifically enumerated are reserved for the States and the People.
10th amendment equal sovereignty, Congress can create any law it deems necessary, as long as it applies to all states.
There are exceptions, such as voting regulations for southern states with a track record of voter suppression.
The there’s the exceptions for Northern states with their record of deceased voter multiplication.
You want the dead to be disenfranchised?
Twice now! +++
The Kingdom of Hawaii was illegal invaded and illegally annexed.
The Texas Republic was a country with sovereignty of its own.
Puerto Rico is a self-governing territory, acquired by invasion.
Alaska is a Russian province bought via an unequal treaty.
Most of the USA was stolen, and all it’s laws are an artifice.
Voter suppression in southern states was mostly by Democrats.
All land on earth has been stolen so many times that we are still discovering new ancient thefts of land by peoples no longer existant.
My guess was, let’s just kiss and say goodbye, lol
Neither Utah or the Federal government have sovereignty. Sovereignty is a misnomer for governments. To be sure, when reading the first three words of the Preamble to the Constitution it specifically states that the people are sovereign. This is founded upon the Enlightenment principle that Legitimate governments are founded upon the will the people. Any government(s) not founded upon the will of people are Illegitimate.
Please read the first three words of the Preamble for further edification:
We the People……
The fifty-five Founders at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia came together because the Articles of Confederation were not working in their estimation. In essence they sought to repeal the sovereignty of the states. The Constitution was ratified by eventually the 13 states by bodies selected by the state authorities.
The case is closed until another revolution, civil war or the document is amended by 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the several states’ legislature or states set up convention for amending the Constitution. The other alternative is that the states call a constitutional convention solely for the purpose of amending the Constitution which also requires a 2/3 majority.
Every poli-sci textbook on geopolitics has an entire chapter on nation-state sovereignty. Nation-states have sovereignty; it’s the foundation of how the entire anarchic system of governments functions every day.
Sovereignty, yes, to create their own laws, but not to bypass Federal law.
i.e. The Feds can create education minimum standards, states can increase these standards, but not fall under them.
Governments that do not have tenets of freedom of thought, speech, press, religion, judicial independence, multiple political parties, majority rule and protection of minority rights are illegitimate.
Geopolitics, or another word for foreign affairs, defense, economics and geography are another kettle of fish.
The US policy of Manifest Destiny and the Monroe Doctrine were geopolitical. Pax Americana during the post WW II period through the remainder of the 20th Century and the approximately the first decile of the 21st are modern day geopolitical.
Correct… ask the subjects of the illegally annexed Kingdom of Hawai’i about their sovereignty.
No… people have sovereignty, nation-states do not, they are just admin.
I’ll take Mick J lyrics for $500:
Q: What to do about Fed overreach?
A: You can’t .. always get .. what you want …
But seriously … 10th Amendment has been eviscerated in modern era.
Further evidence for the dissolution of the country breaking up into red and blue states. Seems to be inevitable and accelerating, looks like.
If there is a breakup it will not be so clean as blue states vs red states. Look at the history of the civil war. In particular, study the travails of east Tennessee. When I was in OCS, we examined the conflict there in detail. Expect such if we begin disintegration. I pray this does not occur. We must find common ground.
Agree with your post. At the same time the Civil War was more geographic than were a new civil war or revolution breakout.
For example, today there are blue counties in numerous red states such as Ohio, Texas, Arizona, Oklahoma, etc.. There are also several red counties in blue states California, NY, Pennsylvania, etc. If a civil war or revolution were to occur in the US again, I would argue it will be along class lines, centralization vs decentralization in the main more than geography or slavery.
Oregon is another example. The majority of counties outside of the Willamette Valley voted to join the Greater Idaho movement.
It’s kind of why West Virginia exists… the princple is sound and consistent with the constitution… the solution may be to just split up some states and merge some other states, like gerrymandering.
Blue cities versus Red gun owners.
“common ground” is that the principles of the republic, where people were able to live in different ways in different states, are re-asserted. The conflict is between those who want to abolish these principles, and those who don’t.
There can’t be any halfway compromise… if the other side rejects the core fundamental princples of a republic, then they are fighting to become Canada, where people are subjects with limited constitutional rights.
Dissolution isn’t even a remote risk here in the states, but more a thing Russian propagandists continue pushing in online forums & Social media.
and yet propagandists like you want to see the dissolution of Russia and it’s territory in order to preserve an artificial border of a corrupt fascist state that spent 8 years trying to ethnically cleanse Russians, Romanians, Hungarians.
I appreciate the compliment, but I’m just a plain ole U.S. citizen who’s angry with Putin’s meddling & manipulation over my countries politics.
Dissolving Russia would be a disaster, I’d be happy to see the Russian people legitimately vote for a decent leader, at least not a genocidal sociopath who regularly murders anyone that runs against him in elections.
Unfortunately, Putin has murdered Navalny, you’ll have to find another decent man.
I’m sure you’ll say that was an accident, “sudden death syndrome” n’ such.
.
.
Feds to cut razor wire
Texas to string up even more faster
militia – set to mine razor wire areas
Interesting turn of events. It is a turn back to local solutions to local problems.
Local meaning, in my mind, multi-state — as in, US states.
At the state level.
Go to the county level. Most of the covid restrictions in my Texas county came from a county judge.
It’s developed world phenomenon ultimately driven by what’s happening in global economics… and you will see the same in Europe as well as North America. It can’t really happen so much in Australasia, because it’s too small a population.
The Federal government cannot compel states to enforce federal laws, rules, or regulations. There’s nothing new here.
State governments cannot prevent the Federal government from coming in and enforcing Federal laws. The Utah legislation does not interfere with the Federal prerogative.
The Supreme Court did not restrict Texas from placing razor wire, or new razor wire. They only stated the obvious which is that the federal government can remove it or cut it.
That States and the Federal government can operate at cross purposes is a long-standing and unresolved constitutional issue. Clearly, the Supreme Court is disinclined to resolve it now.
“The Federal government cannot compel states to enforce federal laws, rules, or regulations.”
Yes, they can.
.
Sure.
The Feds can write-up yet another law.
Were sanctuary cities compelled to enforce Federal law? No they weren’t. If enough people do not follow a law then it is unenforceable except by the use of violence and even then it might not be possible.
The way they compel them is via money, not force.
Simply cut off federal money and sanctuary cities or rogue states will fall in line quickly because none of them are self sufficient.
2 cases of doing this were:
55 mph speed limits in the 70s on all highways (remember those)
21 legal drinking age (used to be states set their own but the Feds mandated 21 and threatened to cut off funding for anyone who didn’t adopt it)
Well, the State is defined by (among other things) the State’s monopoly on the use of violence.
So when Ike nationalized the Arkansas Air and National to enforce a SC decision of school integration, this action didn’t compel the state of Arkansas or the school board of Little Rock to integrate?
Don’t bother to answer unless you agree and write yes the Feds can compel the states to act in accordance with the laws of the nation.
If you still must disagree and insist on repeating that the Federal government cannot compel the states to enforce federal laws, then you’ve doubled down on your lack of historical events.
As always it depends on who has the most and biggest weapons.
Feds can also invade and illegally annex other countries like Hawaii, and compel them to become states against their will, and prevent them from having self-determination, or dissolving all illegal annexation laws.
The takeover of Hawai’i was not so much military as it was capitalism’s greed, racism by the Caucasians and the executive branch doing the bidding of the malefactors.
Did the end justify the means?
In the exercise of power it is what was the intention and the desired outcome that determines if it is just. If the end is justice, brotherhood, equality of opportunity, freedom, then the means deployed should be commensurate to the goal.
Clearly, greed, racism is not an appropriate means when taking property from a native population.
However enforcing a just SC decision whose aim was to attempt to achieve equal opportunity through education then the means deployed justified the ends.
Conflating greed, rascism and theft actions with equality is a maneuver of someone that is morally confused.
What do you think about the Bush/Obama administrations taking state National Guardsmen and using them as federal military personnel overseas without regard to various state governors?
Federal funding is a terrific way to compel enforcement of federal rules (e.g. roadway funding in exchange for adopting various standards/rules) and the threat of withholding it has been quite effective over the years.
This will speed up the repeal of every Federal regulation not specifically passed by Congress. The US Constitution does not give the legislative branch permission to delegate its lawmaking function to the executive branch. And just because Congress has insufficient will to use its power of checks and balances against the executive branch does not mean regulations set for by the executive branch are valid.
You had better read the US Constitution again. The Legislature can delegate its powers to other agencies but it also has oversight of those agencies, departments, etc.
In the end it powers of the purse as delineated in the Constitution makes it the most powerful of the three branches of government.
States don’t need to try to repeal them anyway, they can just drag their feet… the lack of enforcement of laws, and selective politicised enforcement of laws (and non-laws!) across the USA under the Biden regime is visibly pervasive. It’s a Banana Republic.
If Biden can ignore the spirit if not actual directives of the Supreme Court and the laws passed by Congress why can’t the states? If the federal government agencies can ignore citizens rights as enumerated in the Constitution and act as political entities persecuting people selectively based on their political or religious beliefs why can’t states reclaim their rights under the Constitution? The corruption and corporate capture of the administrative and legislative processes seem to warrant strong measures. At this point it appears to me that the federal government’s moral ground appears to be the size of the head of a straight pin. The Supreme Court has made some decisions that some consider to be compromised. Has greed & corruption completely fractured the contract between the federal government and the states?
Biden while he is president is limited in what he can and cannot do. It is up the House to prosecute and the Senate to convict the president if he violates his oath of office.
As an extreme example, Lincoln in the Civil War violated the Constitution of freedom of speech. It is still debated whether he violated habeas corpus.
When he won the election of 1864 the ultimate sovereign, the people, sanctioned his unconstitutional act(s) by delegating to him another four year term.
…but he should still have been prosecuted for previous illegal acts, because by not doing so, the principle of a president acting illegally in office is held up, it was recently found that presidents can pardon themselves for everything.
A president of Lincoln’s magnanimity at the end of the war, his outstanding leadership, and the love from the people and the non-commissioned and officers of the Union Army was never going to get prosecuted because he was so admired.
Wars, particularly civil wars cause leaders to look the other way when their cause is freedom, equality, justice.
The situation is bleak. The federal government has reached far beyond its Constitutional limitations, has been weaponized by Democrats against political opponents, and vital checks and balances have been eradicated by a gargantuan unelected, unaccountable bureaucracy. The federal government is at war with almost everyone abroad and even its own citizens, yet can’t bring itself to fulfill its basic function of domestic security through securing its own borders and sovereignty.
The sword cuts both ways. Yes Fed government is out of control but so are the social leeches asking for more social security, medicare, and other government goodies. Just mention cutting social security here and you’ll hear howls to the moon because you know “they paid for it” and they are “entitled” to it. The largest part of the government spend are social programs. Everyone here that hates big government can be a superhero by going over to the social security office and telling them to shut off their own personal socialism spigot but not a single person will do it, not even the “libertarians” because you know they “paid for it.”
And that’s why no state will ever secede because social security and medicare checks will not be going out to “free and independent” states/countries at a time that large swaths of the population are too old to work and addicted to that money for their daily livelihood. I know Utah won’t be providing their own social security to seniors, they don’t even provide basic services to most people.
A state like Utah is also landlocked and I can imagine California (or Washington or Oregon) screwing Utah with tariffs for access to the sea and all those goods and services that come from China.
I can imagine California building a wall and making Utah pay for it. Lol. But the real problem for Utah will be water, I wonder where they are going to get it when the lakes run dry.
link to deseret.com
A) I guess the “free and independent” states/countries didn’t get Social Security and Medicare they would stop collecting taxes for the Feds and keep the money at home.
B) If Utah needs water they might keep it rather than letting it run off south.
Ain’t none of this stuff simple.
Lighten Up Francis…
If you look for a bleak situation, you can find it online. If you look at how MOST of the country runs…including most of the states, they are doing fine. If the Republicans would actually focus on a platform instead of a “lost election” and put up anyone other than “Orange Mussolini’ they might win an election.
As Independents, we’re sick of all of the crap from BOTH of the parties.
Set Term Limits,
Campaign Finance Reform and
take some of the power for the elections away from the two political parties.
They should NOT be in charge of our elections…they’re NOT the actual government…they’re corrupt on both sides and need to be reined in.
Cheers!
And what mechanism do the states have when the federal govt exceeds its authority? The way govt works here, as you know…..people—>states—>federal. Enumerated powers, as described in the constitution. Now, the feds have grabbed extra constitutional powers over the years, and as the saying goes…once the govt grabs some power, for “emergencies”, you will never get it back.
For instance….where does the federal govt get the power to create the fed? Float the currency? Regulate carbon, mandate electric cars, shut down coal plants, etc? NONE of these are in the constitution, yet here we are. Hawaii tried to overrule the supreme court in the 2nd amd recently, but that is right no government can remove. Enumerated.
Provide for the common defense IS the responsibility of the feds, and if they dont provide that, the states, re Texas, can do it themselves….
I think a BIG problem with government at all levels lately, is the attitude of “If it doesnt say we can’t, then we can”. Which is 100% inverted from how the government was setup….”unless we clearly tell you you can, then you cannot”.
Period
“And what mechanism do the states have when the federal govt exceeds its authority?”
Petition the courts is one means.
As to your stance that only enumerated powers are legitimate you are wrong.
link to constitution.congress.gov‘,%20’of’,%20’powers’]
What court can Hawaiians go to to dissolve the illegal annexation of their country?
Obama federal troops killed the Bundy ranchers in Nevada.
It was not a Bundy who was killed but one of their colleagues The dispute was over grazing rights of Government land reserved for public use. Open range grazing on marginal land is very destructive. Every plant is hanging on for survival. Also cows are hard on available water sources they congregate at,and make it a mess with erosion, enhanced mosquito habitat from water carrying footprints in the mud, and eating the most luscious plant life along the water .I have owned acreage in open range territory and the creek side was fenced to keep cattle out. What a difference in habitat from unfenced stream sides.
The Bundy patriarch made a very meaningful statement that people would be better off picking cotton, rather than being unproductive sitting all day. i think he was addressing ALL of the passive income types who do nothing productive for their money. Passive income without producing anything is known to rot the soul whether rich or poor.
Nah, passive income makes for a happier friendlier retirement.
Rather than these futile amd emotional acts by states, a Constitutional Convention is what’s needed.
You might be being prophetic!
Ehhh….that’s scary. Imagine it runs away with blue states and RINO’s running it. We are SCREWED if that happens.
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” — Lysander Spooner
The question is, can a Constitution that IS fit to exist be crafted? The optimist in me remains hopeful.
Just need to bring back the requirement of land ownership to be able to vote.
The Swiss Confederation is a federal republic of 26 cantons. The latest version of it’s constitution is 1999. Their systems seem to have worked well for the Swiss for a few hundred years.
Nope, Con Con’s are a con. Doubtful a convention of the current states will get a better deal than just dealing with the constitution as is rather than what the Supreme Court SAYS about the constitution.
it’s not much better than states like Maine and Colorado trying to ban leading candidates from the ballot.
“It’s a symbolic measure.”
This is true, but for alot of people it will be perceived as Utah giving the middle finger to the Feds. Most won’t read any details about the bill or even stop and think carefully about what the bill actually does (not a whole lot). But it will make Republicans in Utah look great to thier base and like devils to Democrats.
In the TX didn’t Abbot defy the order without consequence.? I am gad he did. This all seems like a slow motion start of a civil war/seccessionist movement. Unless we have rational leadership in DC this will continue. Neither party has such a candidate running for president.
When red states start coordinating an alternate common currency to be used only within their respective state borders, secessionism has begun.
As a former resident of the Lone Star state they’ve always thought that they are independent. They were wrong then when I lived there and if they think they can defy federal law they are wrong now.
They can thank their lucky stars that the current president is addle minded and whomever or what cabal is running the executive branch do not know how to get Abbott back in the fold as LBJ did with the red neck Wallace.
SCOTUS ruling didn’t prohibit Texas from putting up razor wire, just said that Texas can’t stop feds from removing the wire. So Texas puts up wire, feds remove it, Texas puts up more.
This is another indicator that there is very little left for 50 states to unite around when dealing with a rapacious “United Sate” and administrative state that fails to see or recognize ANY limit on its powers. The hunger is for decentralization…the meal served up is ever more centralization.
Departments in the executive branch have gone rogue using Chevron deference for some time. I think that the Supreme Court will bring this to an end at years end with a ruling. This law may be moot shortly.
What Utah is attempting adds weight to my argument that the US will undergo a civil dis-union (a divorce) before a civil war. States are already taking practical steps, such as those that have monetized gold and silver and have even begun state bullion reserves. Look at Texas and its new army camp at the border.
This is just another step into what might prove to be inevitable.