By Ron Holland

Just following Congress, the 2012 presidential campaign and the inability of citizens to influence government policy makes it clear to every American how broken the US political system has become. A few powerful interests run the entire show and the American people are being forced down a dark road to economic destruction. History shows us that Washington is immune to conventional national political action under the present system. What can freedom loving Americans do?

So do freedom advocates just give up or wait for the eventual collapse of the economy and the US political system?

There is only one effective, democratic and peaceful tool left to Americans to defend their liberties and restore the original republic of our founding fathers. It is the right of state sovereignty and nullification.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Dr. Chuck Baldwin

On March 14, 2011, federal police agencies raided scores of marijuana-related businesses in a number of states–including my home State of Montana. Hundreds of people were detained, put in handcuffs, and their property seized. To my knowledge, however, only a handful has actually been arrested (at least in Montana).

Montana is one of several states in the union that has legalized marijuana for medical purposes. This was accomplished with overwhelming support from the Montana citizenry via a ballot initiative back in 2004. However, the feds view marijuana as an illegal drug, and seem hell-bent in forcing states such as Montana to submit to its dictation–regardless of what the will of the people within the states might be.

Ever since Appomattox Court House, states have been bullied into believing that their authority is subordinate, and, yes, inferior, to federal law. Big Government lawyers cite the US Constitution, Article. VI. Paragraph. 2. to justify their despotism. It reads, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

This paragraph of the Constitution has been construed to mean that the federal government may dictate any law to the states and the states have no right to resist. THIS IS NOT TRUE! Notice carefully what the Constitution says: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States WHICH SHALL BE MADE IN PURSUANCE THEREOF . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” (Emphasis added)

This means that any federal law that is NOT “made in Pursuance thereof” or otherwise does not comport with the Constitution is NOT the “supreme Law of the Land.” Furthermore, it is the states that are the final authority over what is and is not lawful within their respective borders!

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

“If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”

Federal Judge Roger Vinson opens his decision declaring ObamaCare unconstitutional with that citation from Federalist No. 51, written by James Madison in 1788. His exhaustive and erudite opinion is an important moment for American liberty, and yesterday may well stand as the moment the political branches were obliged to return to the government of limited and enumerated powers that the framers envisioned.

As Judge Vinson took pains to emphasize, the case is not really about health care at all, or the wisdom—we would argue the destructiveness—of the newest entitlement. Rather, the Florida case goes to the core of the architecture of the American system, and whether there are any remaining limits on federal control. Judge Vinson’s 78-page ruling in favor of 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business, among others, is by far the best legal vindication to date of Constitutional principles that form the outer boundaries of federal power.

At the heart of the states’ lawsuit is the individual mandate, which requires everyone to purchase health insurance or be penalized for not doing so. “Never before has Congress required that everyone buy a product from a private company (essentially for life) just for being alive and residing in the United States,” Judge Vinson writes.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Wendy McElroy

The discombobulated deputy attorney of Missoula County, Montana, called it “mutiny.” The quiet courtroom insurrection was sparked by the prosecution of a man accused of possessing 1/16th of an ounce of marijuana. One of the 27 potential jurors asked why taxpayer money was being wasted in such a manner; thereupon the judge polled the entire jury pool. Most of them affirmed their refusal to convict on such a minor possession. Earlier, other potential jurors had been excused over “philosophical objections.”

At this point District Judge Dusty Deschamps reportedly reflected, “Geez, I don’t know if we can seat a jury,” and called a recess. Instead of a trial, the prosecutor worked out a plea deal, which read, in part: “Public opinion, as revealed by the reaction of a substantial portion of the members of the jury … is not supportive of the state’s marijuana law and appeared to prevent any conviction from being obtained simply because an unbiased jury did not appear available under any circumstances.”

Jury nullification did not technically occur in Missoula because no jury was seated. Nevertheless, the incident is viewed as a triumph for nullification, and the strategy is reinvigorated.

What is jury nullification? Does it provide a reliable path to freedom or justice?

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Michael Boldin

There are a few core beliefs that guide me in everything I do as the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center

1. Rights are not “granted” to us by the government — they are ours by our very nature, by our birthright.
2. ALL just political authority is derived from the people — and government exists solely with our consent!
3. We the people of the several states created the federal government — not the other way around!
4. The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government in the Constitution — and nothing more.
5. The People of each State have the sole and exclusive right and power to govern themselves in all areas not delegated to their government.
6. A Government without limits IS A TYRANNY!
7. When Congress enacts laws and regulations that are not made in Pursuance of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, the People are not bound to obey them.

These seven items — are what establish the proper role of government under the constitution. But sadly, an honest reading of the constitution as the founders and ratifiers gave it to us makes clear that MOST of what D.C does today is NOT authorized by the constitution.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Dr. Jack Wheeler

The political problems of America can no longer be answered by the standard or normal interpretation of the Constitution provided by America’s Ruling Class of judges, politicians, pundits, and academics.

So let’s talk about The Structure of Political Revolutions.

America’s problems and political puzzles can only be solved by a paradigm shift to a more fundamental understanding of America’s founding structure, a paradigm shift to Revolutionary Constitutionalism.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

[The position of County Sheriff is the last line of defense against a tyrannical federal government. If we want to neuter the federalies, we must elect County Sheriffs who understand the power of their office and are willing to use it. -Ed.]

“The office of sheriff has a long and noble history. It dates back over a thousand years and originated in England. The sheriff is the only elected law enforcement official in America. He is the last line of defense for his citizens. He is the people’s protector. He is the keeper of the peace, he is the guardian of liberty and the protector of rights.”

“In Mack/Printz v USA, the U S Supreme Court declared that the states or their political subdivisions, “are not subject to federal direction.”

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Every couple of years the same drearily predictable charade repeats itself. This time we’re really going to limit government! Or so they tell us. We on the Right then dutifully compose our letters to the editor, attend rallies, and vote for candidates without whom, we are breathlessly assured, we shall all revert instantly to barbarism. And no matter who wins, the federal government grows and grows. The Right gets a bunch of pretty speeches, and the Left gets the victories.

The passive approach of crossing our fingers and hoping Washington will follow the Constitution has not worked. The only surprising thing about it is that anyone could have expected it to work in the first place. It is long past time for those of us who want to confine the federal government to its constitutional limits to try something different.

The time has come to revisit nullification, the quintessentially American mode of resistance against federal lawlessness that Thomas Jefferson urged as an essential ingredient of our political system.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Carl Bruning

“It is time for the sworn protectors of Liberty, the County Sheriffs, to walk tall and defend their citizens from all enemies of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.”

Americans are facing the stark reality that their Constitutional rights are being shredded. Nearly every action taken by the Federal government today violates the Constitution that sheriffs and the military have taken an oath to defend. The Sheriff may truly be the last hope for saving our constitutional Republic and our liberties.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Randy E. Barnett

A”tell” in poker is a subtle but detectable change in a player’s behavior or demeanor that reveals clues about the player’s assessment of his hand. Something similar has happened with regard to the insurance mandate at the core of last month’s health reform legislation. Congress justified its authority to enact the mandate on the grounds that it is a regulation of commerce. But as this justification came under heavy constitutional fire, the mandate’s defenders changed the argument—now claiming constitutional authority under Congress’s power to tax.

This switch in constitutional theories is a tell: Defenders of the bill lack confidence in their commerce power theory. The switch also comes too late. When the mandate’s constitutionality comes up for review as part of the state attorneys general lawsuit, the Supreme Court will not consider the penalty enforcing the mandate to be a tax because, in the provision that actually defines and imposes the mandate and penalty, Congress did not call it a tax and did not treat it as a tax.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

“We’ve got some altering and abolishing to do!”

Click below to watch video.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Frank Miele

Hear ye, hear ye:

“Resolved, that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principles of unlimited submission to their General Government; … that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force…”

Do you agree?

Or do you think it is crazy for states and individuals to reject unlimited submission to the federal government?

Certainly, in the wake of a new law that orders American citizens to surrender their right to make their own decisions about the most personal of matters — their health and well-being — it is no surprise that many states have indeed risen up to protest against what appears to be an unconstitutional seizure of power by Congress.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and 12 state attorneys general today filed a legal action challenging the constitutionality of the recently enacted federal health care law. The bipartisan legal challenge explains that the new law infringes upon Americans’ constitutionally protected individual liberties; encroaches upon the states’ constitutionally guaranteed sovereignty; forces states to spend billions of additional dollars on entitlement programs; imposes an unconstitutional tax; and violates the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Under the new law, for the first time in the nation’s history, the federal government is attempting to force individual Americans to enter into contracts and purchase services from private companies-in this case, insurance companies-or face a penalty. The state attorneys general are challenging this so-called individual mandate requirement, explaining that such an imposition on the American people exceeds Congress’ authority and violates Americans’ constitutional rights.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

Today, Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter welcomed legislative sponsors to his office at the Capitol today for the signing of House Bill 391 – the Idaho Health Freedom Act.
“Congress and the White House are working out their scheme for pushing through a healthcare ‘reform’ bill that has more pages than the U.S. Constitution has words. I [...]

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Kevin Gutzman

In 1836, the expiring James Madison offered “Advice to My Country”:

The advice nearest to my heart and deepest in my convictions, is that the Union of the States be cherished and perpetuated. Let the open enemy to it be regarded as a Pandora with her box opened, and the disguised one as the serpent creeping with deadly wiles into Paradise.

Madison’s concern for the future of the union had been piqued by the Nullification Controversy and the growing appeal of states’ rights.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Conn Carroll

As written, the current health care bill before Congress already is guaranteed to face serious constitutional challenges on enumerated powers, 5th Amendment, racial discrimination, and unequal state treatment. Now the White House seems determined to add a whole new reason courts will throw out Obamacare on sight.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Jonathan Martin

Bob McDonnell, Chris Christie and Scott Brown scored recent Republican victories by singing from the same political hymnal: focusing on kitchen-table issues, criticizing Washington without demeaning the president and keeping their distance from the GOP’s most polarizing figures. Their strategies resounded in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts and won plaudits from GOP establishment voices as the way to win in the Obama era.

Meanwhile, Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry has embraced the cause of state sovereignty, suggested his famously independent state could secede from the union, deemed the president a socialist and, last month in Houston, happily stood by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s side to receive her endorsement.

As Texas Republicans go to the polls for the state’s gubernatorial primary, Perry’s approach seems to be paying dividends. He enjoys a wide lead in polls over his chief primary opponent, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, and the only real question that remains is whether he can crest the 50 percent needed to avoid a runoff in his quest for a third full term.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

John Boehner is right! The Federal Government does not have the Constitutional authority to make any citizen buy any product. Period!

Any Congressman or Senator who votes for a patently unconstitutional bill should be removed from office.

Click Below To Watch Video

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Karl Rove

There has been a lot of talk about combining the tea party movement with the Republican Party. And on a small scale, that seemed to happen last week in South Carolina after state GOP representatives agreed to create a “Tea Party Republicans” group to coordinate activities with tea partiers in Greenville and Spartanburg.

This week, however, those arrangements fell apart as some tea party groups dissented from the decision. Other attempts to draw tea party groups into formal alliances are running into similar difficulties. That is a good thing. The tea party movement will be more effective than it otherwise would be if it refuses to allow itself to become an appendage of either major political party.

The tea partiers have made an important splash because they are not yet another auxiliary to the Democratic or Republican parties. Like the pro-life and Second Amendment movements before it, the tea party movement will have a bigger impact if it holds the feet of politicians in both parties to its fire. Each party must know it can win or lose swing tea party voters.

The movement arose spontaneously as ordinary Americans reacted to a rising tide of federal spending and debt, growing federal power, and the too-cozy relationship between Washington and corporate America.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]

By Ed Stoddard

DALLAS, Feb 16 (Reuters) – Texas and several national industry groups on Tuesday filed separate petitions in federal court challenging the government’s authority to regulate U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

Texas, which leads U.S. states in carbon dioxide emissions due to its heavy concentration of oil refining and other industries, will see a major impact if U.S. mandatory emissions reductions take effect.

In December, the Environmental Protection Agency ruled that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide endanger human health, opening the door for the agency to issue mandatory regulations to reduce them.

Texas said it had filed a petition for review challenging the EPA’s “endangerment finding” with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Texas has also asked the EPA to reconsider its ruling.

“The EPA’s misguided plan paints a big target on the backs of Texas agriculture and energy producers and the hundreds of thousands of Texans they employ,” Texas Gov. Rick Perry said.

[ READ THE FULL ARTICLE ]