Tenth Amendment Movement Aims to Give Power Back to the States

[Chris_]

Tenth Amendment Movement Aims to Give Power Back to the States

The 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.
-- U.S. Constitution, Tenth Amendment

Fed up with Washington's involvement in everything from land use to gun control to education spending, states across the country are fighting back against what they say is the federal government's growing intrusion on their rights.

At least 35 states have introduced legislation this year asserting their power under the Tenth Amendment to regulate all matters not specifically delegated to the federal government by the Constitution.

*snip*

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer recently signed into law a bill authorizing the state's gun manufacturers to produce "Made in Montana" firearms, without seeking licensing from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Similar laws are being considered in Utah, Alaska, Texas and Tennessee.

The Montana law is expected to end up in the courts, where states' rights activists hope judges will uphold their constitutional right to regulate firearms.

MORE

Oh, Barry ain't gonna like this.  Heh.   

[NHSparky]

Problem is, most of these states rights resolutions don't mean squat unless and until the states are willing to reject federal dollars.  Then and only then can states tell the feds to jam it AND MEAN IT.  Until then, it's all pandering to the crowd.

[Chris_]

Problem is, most of these states rights resolutions don't mean squat unless and until the states are willing to reject federal dollars.  Then and only then can states tell the feds to jam it AND MEAN IT.  Until then, it's all pandering to the crowd.

If I remember correctly, the only one of these "10th Amendment" resolutions that has had any teeth in has been - correct me if I'm wrong here - Texas.  They put a provision in theirs stating that if the Federal Government comes after a citizen of the state of Texas for "violating" a federal statute that the federal government had no constitutional authority to enact, the State of Texas "shall defend" that citizen's actions in court.

Every other one of these resolutions I've seen claims the rights and authorities reserved under the 10th amendment, but leaves the federal government's sacrificial victims to defend themselves - on their own nickel - against federal overstepping.

[NHSparky]

No, you're absolutely correct in that.  And as long as states grovel for the federal dollar, all the paper-waving in the world isn't going to mean jack.

[Chris_]

No, you're absolutely correct in that.  And as long as states grovel for the federal dollar, all the paper-waving in the world isn't going to mean jack.

That's how they lowered the speed limit on interstates to 55mph.  "You want our dollars, you lower the speed limits".  It was not a law, just a condition of getting the federal construction money.

[thundley4]

That's how they lowered the speed limit on interstates to 55mph.  "You want our dollars, you lower the speed limits".  It was not a law, just a condition of getting the federal construction money.

Quite a scam the federal government runs, isn't it?  They take money from the resident's of a state and then blackmail the state to give them some of the money back.

[Chris_]

Quite a scam the federal government runs, isn't it?  They take money from the resident's of a state and then blackmail the state to give them some of the money back.

Hey if that scam works for the mob, why not for the gubmint?
The gumbint is just "protecting" us, right?   

[5412]

Quite a scam the federal government runs, isn't it?  They take money from the resident's of a state and then blackmail the state to give them some of the money back.

Hi,

I can forsee the day when a state tells it's citizens not to pay their Federal Income Taxes.  Get a few states doing that and it will change the entire picture.  Or the state can say to mail the check to the state to hold it in escrow for the federal government, then they can negotiate with the federal government.  You want your tax dollars, OK, but we are deducting all the money we are required to spend on FEDERAL MANDATES that are unconstitutional, like having to treat illegals in our hospitals.

regards,
5412

[Chris_]

Hi,

I can forsee the day when a state tells it's citizens not to pay their Federal Income Taxes.  Get a few states doing that and it will change the entire picture.  Or the state can say to mail the check to the state to hold it in escrow for the federal government, then they can negotiate with the federal government.  You want your tax dollars, OK, but we are deducting all the money we are required to spend on FEDERAL MANDATES that are unconstitutional, like having to treat illegals in our hospitals.

regards,
5412

Only problem I see with a state making a proclamation like that, is that such proclamations are usually SUBSEQUENT in the sequence of events to a state action that hasn't been seen since 1861.  Usually, not having to pay federal taxes is part and parcel with chasing them blue-bellied jackasses out of your home state with weapons of mass instruction.