U.S. Issues Arizona posturing for de facto seccession - Page 6

Taco John · 02-02-2011, 03:24 PM

File this under "nullification isn't as dead as some would like you to believe it is."

http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/EJMontini/117684

E.J. Montini's Columns & Blog
E.J. Montini is a columnist for The Arizona Republic.

Arizona to secede (without OFFICIALLY doing so)

Members of the state Legislature, including Arizona's de facto governor, Senate President Russell Pearce, have introduced a bill that essentially would have Arizona secede from the union without having to do so officially.

Really.

It's called SB1433, (See it here.) It creates a 12-member committee within the legislature that could "vote by simple majority to nullify in its entirety a specific federal law or regulation that is outside the scope of the powers delegated by the people to the federal government…"

Committee members themselves would decide this, then pass along their recommendation to the full Legislature. If, in turn, a majority of state lawmakers go along with the committee then, according to the bill, "this state and its citizens shall not recognize or be obligated to live under the statute, mandate or executive order."

The nullification committee also would be permitted to review all existing federal laws to see if our legislative geniuses want to toss them out as well.

In every legislative session in every state throughout the land there are proposals like this, usually made by a few fringe members who know their proposal has no chance but file it anyway to serve some personal or political agenda.

In this instance, legislators here -- who claim to be strict constitutionalists -- seem fairly willing to ignore what is commonly called the "supremacy clause" of the U.S. Constitution (as well as the Fourteenth Amendment), and which more or less say that federal law supersedes state law.

A state or a person can challenge such laws in court. But a state can't on its own simply declare a federal law to be unconsitutional.

Legislators who propose such things often are quietly patted on the heads and laughed off by their colleagues.

In our case, however, the legislation is being proposed by, among others, Sen. Pearce, the most powerful person in state government.

So, as wacky as the proposal is, that makes it much less of a laughing matter.

Wednesday, February 2, 2011 at 11:57 AM

**petegz28** · 02-02-2011, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

What exactly are you referring to?

How about a mandate that forces people to buy health insurance simply for existing in this country?

I mean hell, we go down that route, in Obama's words, we could solve homelessness by forcing everyone to buy a house.

**petegz28** · 02-02-2011, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

"The people" elected this government, pete.

Yeah, cause politicians never say one thing and do another. Never, I say!!!!

The Mad Crapper · 02-02-2011, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

I love this country and its continuation is worth dying for

Puh-leeze.

You're a big ****ing pussy who lives with your parents.

Jenson71 · 02-02-2011, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28

I sure do put in a lot of hours for not making it in the working world.

Good for you. I like that people are willing to work a lot of hours. What kind of money do you make?

Taco John · 02-02-2011, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

This is a fool's errand. State-level nullification of a federal constitutional law does not exist. You cant wave a magic wand at the supremacy clause. If a state doesn't like federal law and that law is determined by the federal appeals or supreme courts to be constitutional, then they should either live with it or secede and declare themselves to be an independent sovereign nation. If they don't or can't do that, then federal law will be enforced, by the U.S. marshals and the army if necessary.

You're talking about a civil war...

**petegz28** · 02-02-2011, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

Good for you. I like that people are willing to work a lot of hours. What kind of money do you make?

that's none of your business but suffice it to say I would classify myself at the lower end of the upper middle-class.

BucEyedPea · 02-02-2011, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

"The people" elected this government, pete.

Please show me where the Constitution forbids any state from leaving?
Remember it only has "specific and enumerated" powers not broad general powers....those were left to the states.

Please, don't give me that it's a contract. The Articles of Confederation were a contract too and they were written in perpetuity and could only be amended unanimously. So if you use that, then that was a broken contract too. It actually was because the Con Convention turned out to be a runaway convention.

**Donger** · 02-02-2011, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28

How about a mandate that forces people to buy health insurance simply for existing in this country?

I mean hell, we go down that route, in Obama's words, we could solve homelessness by forcing everyone to buy a house.

I'd like to see what the SC has to say about that before supporting secession, thanks.

The Mad Crapper · 02-02-2011, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

I like that people are willing to work a lot of hours.

Like your parents who support you?

You're a disgraceful little twat.

Jenson71 · 02-02-2011, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Mad Crapper

Jenson's never been laid.

I take seriously the Church's doctrine and am unapologetic for it. I'm sorry the teachings are a joke to you, a self-proclaimed avowed Catholic.

Bowser · 02-02-2011, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Mad Crapper

Puh-leeze.

You're a big ****ing pussy who lives with your parents.

As usual, you bring nothing to the table. Quick, go start another Obama thread!

BucEyedPea · 02-02-2011, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Mad Crapper

Puh-leeze.

You're a big ****ing pussy who lives OFF your parents.

FYP since I believe he's in college, unless he commutes to be closer to mom and dad.

**Donger** · 02-02-2011, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Please show me where the Constitution forbids any state from leaving?
Remember it only has "specific and enumerated" powers not broad general powers....those were left to the states.

Please, don't give me that it's a contract. The Articles of Confederation were a contract too and they were written in perpetuity and could only be amended unanimously. So if you use that, then that was a broken contract too. It actually was because the Con Convention turned out to be a runaway convention.

I'm merely pointing out that this government was elected by "the people." I don't have a dog in whatever fight you have with Amno.

Bowser · 02-02-2011, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Mad Crapper

Like your parents who support you?

You're a disgraceful little twat.

At least Jenson's in college. What have you ever done to make your parents proud of you?

BucEyedPea · 02-02-2011, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

I'd like to see what the SC has to say about that before supporting secession, thanks.

Appealing to authority like a good Tory would. Honest to gawd donger, you're not freedom fighter.

02-02-2011, 03:24 PM
Taco John 12on Paul Join Date: Jun 2001 Casino cash: $11068	Arizona posturing for de facto seccession File this under "nullification isn't as dead as some would like you to believe it is." http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/EJMontini/117684 E.J. Montini's Columns & Blog E.J. Montini is a columnist for The Arizona Republic. Arizona to secede (without OFFICIALLY doing so) Members of the state Legislature, including Arizona's de facto governor, Senate President Russell Pearce, have introduced a bill that essentially would have Arizona secede from the union without having to do so officially. Really. It's called SB1433, (See it here.) It creates a 12-member committee within the legislature that could "vote by simple majority to nullify in its entirety a specific federal law or regulation that is outside the scope of the powers delegated by the people to the federal government…" Committee members themselves would decide this, then pass along their recommendation to the full Legislature. If, in turn, a majority of state lawmakers go along with the committee then, according to the bill, "this state and its citizens shall not recognize or be obligated to live under the statute, mandate or executive order." The nullification committee also would be permitted to review all existing federal laws to see if our legislative geniuses want to toss them out as well. In every legislative session in every state throughout the land there are proposals like this, usually made by a few fringe members who know their proposal has no chance but file it anyway to serve some personal or political agenda. In this instance, legislators here -- who claim to be strict constitutionalists -- seem fairly willing to ignore what is commonly called the "supremacy clause" of the U.S. Constitution (as well as the Fourteenth Amendment), and which more or less say that federal law supersedes state law. A state or a person can challenge such laws in court. But a state can't on its own simply declare a federal law to be unconsitutional. Legislators who propose such things often are quietly patted on the heads and laughed off by their colleagues. In our case, however, the legislation is being proposed by, among others, Sen. Pearce, the most powerful person in state government. So, as wacky as the proposal is, that makes it much less of a laughing matter. Wednesday, February 2, 2011 at 11:57 AM
Posts: 51,309

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode