Our 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolve, Will Defeat the New World Order!

[JTCoyoté]

From jofortruth, who continues to strike sovereignty pay-dirt.

VIRGINIA DECLARES STATE SOVEREIGNTY!

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?091+ful+HR61

089534676
HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 61
Offered February 26, 2009
Honoring state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

----------

Patrons-- Peace, Fralin, Byron, Cline, Cole, Gilbert, Landes, Lingamfelter, Marshall, R.G., Morgan, Ware, R.L. and Wright
----------
Referred to Committee on Rules
----------

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: "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"; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and

WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, the states today are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, many federal laws are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of the United States of America and each sovereign state of the United States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal government may not usurp; and

WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 4 says that “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican form of government,” and the Ninth Amendment states that ”The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”; and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations, and other proposals that may be anticipated, may further violate the Constitution of the United States; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED by the House of Delegates, That the Congress of the United States be urged to honor state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.  The Commonwealth of Virginia hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.  The Commonwealth by this resolution serves notice to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.  Further, the Commonwealth urges that all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding shall be prohibited or repealed.

--Oldyoti

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to
our liberties than standing armies..... The issuing powers
should be taken from the banks and restored to the people
to whom it properly belongs."
~Thomas Jefferson

[xfahctor]

Cripe, this is really catching fire isn't it. How many states does this make this year now? 
 

[JTCoyoté]

Cripe, this is really catching fire isn't it. How many states does this make this year now? 
 

A bunch, that is for sure.

Folks in VA, and elsewhere, now have bill numbers, and need to call and e-mail their state reps to support this movement... remind them that a vote against it, is a vote against reaffirmation of the Constitution.

Virginia is not new to this sovereignty movement, here is their resolution from 1995.

HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 633
Memorializing Congress to observe the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Agreed to by the House of Delegates, February 4, 1995
Agreed to by the Senate, February 21, 1995

WHEREAS, the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States clearly limits the powers of the federal government by stating that "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"; and

WHEREAS, the debate over the powers of the federal government in relation to the several states has raged throughout our history, but the recent actions of the federal government, particularly in the area of unfunded mandates, have rekindled the controversy; and

WHEREAS, state authority has been eroded primarily by (i) federal assumption of powers reserved to the states under the 10th Amendment; (ii) unreasonable interpretations of the "commerce clause" that authorize federal pre-emption with respect to any issue that has any faint or circuitous connection to interstate commerce; (iii) constant threats of withholding, withdrawing, or diverting federal funds to coerce compliance with federal practices; and (iv) failure on the part of the states to challenge federal intrusion, while at the same time showing passive endorsement of federal usurpation by seeking federal funding and by accepting federal delegations of power; and

WHEREAS, that vision of federalism, with the states retaining those powers not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the federal government, has been subverted by an insolvent federal government that imposes increasingly onerous and costly mandates on the states; and

WHEREAS, the assault by the Congress of the United States on the 10th Amendment showing no signs of abating, the time for the states to exert their constitutional rights has come; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED by the House of Delegates, the Senate concurring, That Congress be urged to observe the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The Commonwealth of Virginia hereby claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution; and, be it

RESOLVED FURTHER, That this resolution serve as the Commonwealth of Virginia's notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers; and, be it

RESOLVED FINALLY, That the Clerk of the House of Delegates transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President of the United States Senate, the Attorney General of Virginia, and the members of the Virginia Congressional Delegation so that they may be apprised of the sense of the General Assembly of Virginia.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?951+ful+HJ633ER

JTCoyoté

"He has obstructed the administration of justice...He has erected
 a multitude of new offices and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people...
He has kept among us standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures...
He has effected to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power...
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution..."
The Declaration of Independence, 1776

[dissident99]

For us Texians .. Has the TX one passed ? or should we continue pushing HCR 50 ..

[JTCoyoté]

For us Texians .. Has the TX one passed ? or should we continue pushing HCR 50 ..

Texas introduced The 10th Amendment Sovereignty Resolution in early 1995 and it was adopted unanimously by the Republican party there... unfortunately before they could get it to the floor, the globalists blew up the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City, completely taking of wind out of the sails of the movement... and turned their guns on to the patriot and militia movement in the mainstream media, successfully retarding the growth of the 10th amendment state sovereignty movement for almost 15 years.

here is a link to that resolution... http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2917/wep.html

JTCoyoté

"History records that the money changers have used every
form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible
to maintain their control over governments by controlling
money and its issuance." 
~James Madison

[jimwill]

I am very glad that it passed both houses in Oklahoma!

But, as usual, it is not covered by the MSM.

(Of course if it was they would spin it to be something bad!)

[RHPSmagenta]

Thank God Oregon has one in Draft phase...

I am near tears with joy that maybe JUST MAYBE my state government is waking up

[freedomrik]

anyone know the total number of states now?

[ellas95]

Rep. Sam Rohrer invites constituents to take part in a 10th Amendment Rally to stand for state sovereignty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3WXlVVnegw

http://samrohrer.com/
10th Amendment Rally for the State of Independence
Monday, March 16, at noon
Main Capitol Rotunda
Harrisburg, PA

[dissident99]

Is there a National movement or is it just PA ...

[menace]

A House lawmaker is complaining that the sovereign state of Idaho isn't getting the respect it deserves.

Rep. Dick Harwood, a St. Maries Republican, told the House State Affairs Committee Tuesday that the federal government has overstepped it's role by imposing on states measures like the Endangered Species Act and No Child Left Behind.

State sovereignty is outlined in the 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which says that powers not granted specifically to the federal government are reserved for the states.

Harwood contends the federal government should let states solve problems on their own and is sponsoring a resolution reasserting Idaho's sovereignty.

The committee approved Harwood's resolution and sent it to the full House.

Several states have either passed resolutions reasserting their sovereignty or have legislation pending that does, including New Mexico and Michigan.

http://www.kpvi.com/global/story.asp?s=9939755

[Sasha]

State Sovereignty Movement - 32 & Counting!

(UPDATE 23  –  03/03/09)

*** 32 States already are, are now claiming, or are planning for declaration of sovereignty. ***
==>  We might be losing Virginia.  Call VA representatives and get this bill going again people!  <==

==>  We just lost Washington.  Call WA representatives and get this bill going again people!  <==
NOTE: Based off of input from you wonderful guys and gals, I decided to change up the map again to handle the “sovereign states” data.  I want the data to reflect the fact that some states have passed legislation already, but not within the last year or so.  This distrinction between recent and older action may be an important point in some situations, but I won’t make that call.  However, it has been suggested (by state representatives) that if your state isn’t working on something RIGHT NOW, then you should make every effort to get them to get started as soon as possible.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE: Sovereignty is NOT the same as Secession.  These states (except for Hawaii) are not claiming to leave the union (for now).
All of these ‘movements’ (except for Hawaii) are explicit restatements of what has always been in place, but not necessarily enforced, as detailed by the 10th Amendment.  Hawaii is actually aiming for total sovereignty as it is claimed that Hawaii was never really a state of the U.S.A..

However, I believe the intent of these bills is to let the federal government know that the states’ sovereignty will not be overwritten… say in case certain gun ban laws get passed, FOCA-type laws, or other “War Time / Martial Law” type plans come into play.  Check them out:

http://www.mrstep.com/politics/az-wa-mo-nh-ok-claiming-sovereignty/

[PDXRacer]

Does this relate to the realID fiasco ?

[xfahctor]

Does this relate to the realID fiasco ?

REAL id was one of the many things that spur this movement on

[JTCoyoté]

Jofortruth, you are a researching machine! 

Here is South Dakota's 2009 State Sovereignty Resolution.

State of South Dakota
EIGHTY-FOURTH SESSION
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, 2009
930Q0793
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION  NO.  1013
 
Introduced by: Representatives Steele, Bolin, Brunner, Carson, Cronin, Curd, Cutler,
Deadrick, Dreyer, Engels, Greenfield, Hamiel, Hoffman, Hunt, Jensen,
Juhnke, Kirkeby, Kopp, Krebs, Lange, Lederman, McLaughlin, Moser,
Noem, Novstrup (David), Olson (Betty), Olson (Ryan), Peters, Putnam,
Rausch, Rave, Romkema, Rounds, Russell, Schlekeway, Sly, Solum,
Tidemann, Van Gerpen, Vanneman, Verchio, Wink, and Wismer and
Senators Novstrup (Al), Adelstein, Bartling, Fryslie, Gant, Garnos, Gray,
Hansen (Tom), Haverly, Howie, Hunhoff (Jean), Maher, Nelson, Olson
(Russell), Peterson, Rhoden, and Schmidt

1  A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION, Reasserting sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to
 
2 the Constitution of the United States over certain powers and serving notice to the federal
 
3government to cease and desist certain mandates.
 
4  WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as
 
5 follows:
 
6 "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to
 
7 the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."; and
 
8  WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that
 
9 specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more and the scope of power
 
10 defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states
 
11 specifically to be an agent of the states; and

1  WHEREAS, today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal
 
2 government and many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the
 
3 Constitution of the United States; and
 
4  WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112
 
5 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory
 
6 processes of the states; and
 
7  WHEREAS, any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President
 
8 of the United States of America, or Judicial Order by the judicatories of the United States of
 
9 America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of the United States of
 
10 America by the Constitution of the United States of America and which serves to diminish the
 
11 liberty of any of the several states or their citizens constitutes a nullification of the Constitution 

12 of the United States of America by the government of the United States of America; and
 
13  WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending
 
14 from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the
 
15 United States:
 
16  NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the House of Representatives of the Eighty-
 
17 fourth Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the Senate concurring therein, that the State of
 
18 South Dakota hereby reasserts sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of
 
19 the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal
 
20 government by the Constitution of the United States; and
 
21  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to
 
22 comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass
 
23 legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and
 
24  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this concurrent resolution serve as Notice and Demand

1 to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates
 
2 that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.


http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2009/Bills/HCR1013P.pdf

Oldyoti

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize,
and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert
their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article
[the Second Amendment] in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
~Trence Coxe, "Remarks on the First part of the Amendments
to the Federal Constitution", "A Pennsylvanian" is his pseudonym
in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, 18 June 1789

[JTCoyoté]

Here is Idaho's 2009 State Sovereignty Resolution.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
HOUSE JOINT MEMORIAL NO. 3
BY STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

1 A JOINT MEMORIAL

2 TO THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES

3 IN CONGRESS ASSEMBLED, AND TO THE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION

4 REPRESENTING THE STATE OF IDAHO IN THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED

5 STATES.

6 We, your Memorialists, the House of Representatives and the Senate of the State of Idaho

7 assembled in the First Regular Session of the Sixtieth Idaho Legislature, do hereby respectfully

8 represent that:

9 WHEREAS, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution does not simply

10 provide for a collective right or a right for the states to establish militias; rather it provides for

11 the right of the people to keep and bear arms; and

12 WHEREAS, the primary purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is to protect one’s

13 self, family and possessions from either the private lawlessness of other persons or the tyranny

14 of government; and

15  WHEREAS, the right to keep and bear arms is also meant to protect the general private

16 uses of firearms in activities such as hunting and other sporting activities; and

17  WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 128

18 S.Ct. 2783 (2008), recently struck down a firearms ban in the District of Columbia, explicitly

19 ruling that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to possess firearms for pri­

20 vate use; and

21 WHEREAS, despite this ruling, legislation has been introduced in the United States

22 House of Representatives calling for a system of mandatory federal licensing of all firearm

23 owners; and

24 WHEREAS, the legislation introduced would require all firearm owners to apply for and
 
25 carry a federally issued picture identification in order to keep any firearm in their homes; and
 
26  WHEREAS, the legislation introduced would make it a federal crime to keep a loaded
 
27 firearm or an unloaded firearm and ammunition within any premises including, under certain
 
28 circumstances, American homes where a child may be present; and
 
29 WHEREAS, the legislation introduced specifically purports to preempt any state or local
 
30 law inconsistent with it; and
 
31  WHEREAS, the introduced legislation, Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale
 
32 Act of 2009, is a direct imposition on each American’s individual right to keep and bear arms
 
33 in their homes and for their protection.
 
34  NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the members of the First Regular Session of
 
35 the Sixtieth Idaho Legislature, the House of Representatives and the Senate concurring therein,
 
36 that members of the United States Congress cease and desist attempting to enact federal leg­
 
37 islation impinging on the individual right of every American to keep and bear arms in any
 
38 manner. Specifically, that members of Congress oppose the passage of the Firearm Licensing
 
39 and Record of Sale Act of 2009, and any similar legislation.


1  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Senate be, and she is hereby
 
2 authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the President of the Senate and
 
3 the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Congress, and the congressional delegation
 
4 representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States.


http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2009/HJM003.pdf

JTCoyoté

"The price of liberty is, always has been, and always
will be blood: The person who is not willing to die for
his liberty has already lost it to the first scoundrel
who is willing to risk dying to violate that person's
liberty!  Are you free?"
~Andrew Ford

[Optimus]

Kentucky Senate/House Concurrent Resolution 168 (HCR168)
http://www.examiner.com/x-3747-Louisville-City-Hall-Examiner~y2009m2d26-Kentuckys-new-sovereignty-resolution

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:C_UZPA5Ni6QJ:www.lrc.ky.gov/record/09RS/HC168/bill.doc+HCR+168&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

This is the html version of the file http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/09RS/HC168/bill.doc.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

UNOFFICIAL COPY AS OF 0/0/00 09 REG. SESS. 09 RS BR 1602

UNOFFICIAL COPY AS OF 0/0/00 09 REG. SESS. 09 RS BR 1602

    A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION claiming sovereignty over powers not granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution; serving notice to the federal government to cease mandates beyond its authority; and stating Kentucky's position that federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of loss of federal funding should be prohibited or repealed.
    WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."; and
    WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and
    WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the state; and
    WHEREAS, today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and
    WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
    WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Constitution states that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government..." and the Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."; and
    WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and
    WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States;
    NOW, THEREFORE,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:

    âSection 1.   The Commonwealth of Kentucky hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
    âSection 2.   This Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
    âSection 3.   It is the position of the Commonwealth of Kentucky that all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions, or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.
    âSection 4.   The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall distribute a copy of this Resolution to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate of each state's legislature of the United States of America, and to each member of Kentucky's congressional delegation.
Page of 2

BR160200.100-1602 

[dissident99]

Arkansas Democrats Kill State Sovereignty Bill in Committee
http://arkansasgopwing.blogspot.com/2009/03/arkansas-democrats-kill-state.html
=====================================

[Update 3/5 - Tomorrow 3/6, HCR1011 is scheduled to be voted on again in the House committee; We hope those Democrats who voted against this resolution in committee yesterday will change their minds! Please call the switchboard 501-682-6211 in Little Rock and leave a message with the receptionist for two of the Democrats on the State Agencies Committee that voted against the bill. (You can leave a message for only two.) Ask them to change their vote on the State Sovereignty bill and vote YES for it.]
Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: Arkansas Democrats voted the the straight party line in committee this morning and killed the Arkansas State Sovereignty Bill (HCR1011) in Committee. HCR 1011 was a "non-binding resolution" that evidenced the frustration with the intrusion of the Federal government into areas exclusively belonging to the States. The bill was sponsored by Rep. Debra Hobbs, R-Rogers, Rep. Jon Woods, R-Springdale, and Rep. Roy Ragland, R-Marshall. It read:

    “That the State of Arkansas hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.”

    “Whereas, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and”

    “Be it further resolved that this resolution serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.”

The House Committee on State Agencies defeated the resolution with 8 Republicans voting "for" the bill and 10 Democrats voting against the bill; Republican Donna Hutchinson and Democrat Clark Hall were absent. The Arkansas Democrats didn't even have the gumption to proceed with a non-binding resolution reasserting the authority of the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution. As detailed, in the following video one Democrat committee member evidences her ignorance of the constitution, history and the role of government and tried to tie the bill to slavery and racism.

It very obvious, that just because a person is elected to office doesn't mean that they are there for your best interests and to protect your rights and the Constitution. In fact, many legislators are either ignorant or really believe in the unrestrained expansion of Federal government intrusion (liberalism) into our states, our local government, our schools, and our lives. It is now even clearer that Arkansas Democrats have surrendered the defense of individual liberty, choice, and opportunity and that they are not for limited government. They are for bigger government and greater access to money from all sources to expand that bigger government even if they have to give up some of your State's rights to get those funds. They do not believe that "The ultimate powers in a society rest in the people themselves, and that they should exercise those powers." The Democratic party has left the positions honored by my grandparents who were democrats.


The battle to defend individual liberty is not over unless you as person, a citizen, surrender those rights, freedom and self-worth to the government. Join (there is no cost) other concerned citizens turning activists at Sovereignty Alliance. Finally, there are 10 Democrats that need to know your outrage and 8 Republicans that need your encouragement for standing for the rights of Arkansans today.

Jason Tolbert did a video-interview of Rep. Jon Woods on the State Sovereignty Bill failing in Committee this morning:

[JTCoyoté]

In so doing these "Representatives" have voted against reaffirming the Constitution of the United States of America.

You might call them and remind them that they have just voted against their oath!

JTCoyoté

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims
may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under
robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us
for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so
with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis

[changedname]

If all the state's that are in the works actually do go through with the resolution that will be the majority of the USA! The PTB would have a heck of a time to try to cause problems for all of us because if all that are showing on the map do this we all just have to stand together and what will they do? Those who did not declare will be in the minority!    Go,go,go,...The Fed's were never supposed to be able to take control the way they have in the first place! They have ignored the state's right for far too long and it is time to put a stop to it!!!!!!! Wayyyyyyyyyy past time!

[JTCoyoté]

Once a State has sent the feds their resolve to abide by the Constitution, then they began the process for Constitutional amendment review to bring federal amendments past and proposed into line with Constitutional guidelines reserved to the state by the Constitution. This is the third piece of legislation that sets up the endgame against federal tyranny.

The first move in the process is The State Sovereignty Resolution, then The State Sovereignty Act, and then The State Constitutional Amendment Review Commission Resolution, to review any attempts at a CON-CON, a race that we are in now, as was the case 15 years ago, "Sovereignty vs CON-CON." This commission is created by a resolution such as the one below from the State of California.

1 
Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 57
 
Introduced by Senator Rogers
March 21, 1996
 
Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 57—Relative to the
United States Constitution.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

SCR 57, as introduced, Rogers.

Constitutional
amendments: commission.
This measure would establish a commission to make
determinations on specified questions relating to
amendments to, and procedures guaranteed by, the United
States Constitution, and to report its determinations to the
Legislature no later than January 1, 1998. It would resolve that
upon submission of the report, the commission would be
abolished.

Fiscal committee: no.

1 WHEREAS, It has become increasingly clear that
2 members of our federal government, both past and
3 present, have acted to destroy the sovereignty of the State
4 of California and to subvert the Constitution of the United
5 States, a fact attested to by the United States Senate’s
6 Report No. 93-549, wherein we find: ‘‘This vast range of
7 [presidential emergency] powers ... confer enough
8 authority to rule the country without reference to normal
9 constitutional processes,’’ and the Williamsburg Resolve,
10 drafted at the Republican Governors Conference of 1994,
11 which states: ‘‘Federal action has exceeded the clear
12 bounds of the Constitution’’; and

2

 
1 WHEREAS, There is strong evidence suggesting that
2 one such action by those in our federal government may
3 be their having announced the ratification of, and having
4 implemented, several constitutional amendments whose
5 results are diametrically opposed to constitutional intent,
6 and the liberty our founding fathers sought for
7 Americans, even though the amendments were never
8 properly ratified; and
9 WHEREAS, A comparative analysis of the principles
10 and procedures set forth in the Declaration of
11 Independence and the United States Constitution and
12 the operation of our nation reveals a serious departure
13 from those principles and procedures; and
14 WHEREAS, The initiation and continuation of these
15 policies, and the legislation in support of them is the result
16 of the emergency powers of the President enacted in
17 1933, and constitutional amendments that are
18 inconsistent with the spirit and intent of our nation’s
19 founders; and
20 WHEREAS, The general and complete disarmament
21 program being carried out today under Public Law 87-297
22 will soon result in the United States being unable to
23 defend itself should Americans decide to return their
24 government to within the limits prescribed by the United
25 States Constitution; now, therefore, be it
26 Resolved by the Senate of the State of California, the
27 Assembly thereof concurring, That the Legislature of the
28 State of California hereby establishes a commission to
29 make determinations on the following:
30  (a) Why the United States Senate, in its Report No.
31 93-549, said that ‘‘freedoms and governmental
32 procedures guaranteed by the Constitution’’ have been
33 ‘‘abridged’’ since 1933.
34  (b) Whether the federal government intends to
35 repeal the emergency powers of the President and
36 reinstate the United States Constitution as the supreme
37 law of the land, and if not, the action required by the
38 states to ensure that its agent takes that action promptly.
39  (c) Whether Amendments 11 to 26, inclusive, to the
40 United States Constitution were properly ratified, and

3

1 the impact these amendments have had on the operation
2 of our nation.
3  (d) Whether there are any constitutional
4 amendments that were properly ratified, but
5 subsequently removed without due process; and be it
6 further
7 Resolved, That the commission be composed of
8 members appointed by the Joint Rules Committee
9 necessary to carry out the duties and mission of the
10 commission, with a chairperson and vice chairperson to
11 be appointed by the Joint Rules Committee; and be it
12 further
13 Resolved, That any expenses incurred by the
14 commission in carrying out its duties shall be paid from
15 the respective operating funds of the Senate and the
16 Assembly, to be disbursed upon direction of the Joint
17 Rules Committee; and be it further
18 Resolved, That the commission report its
19 determinations to the Legislature no later than January
20 1, 1998; and be it further
21 Resolved, That upon submission of the report the
22 commission shall be abolished.

JTCoyoté

"The Law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it!
The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an
entirely contrary purpose! The law became the weapon of every kind of greed!
Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!
If this is true, it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me to call the attention
of my fellow-citizens to it." ~Frederic Bastiat, from "The Law", 1850

[MasSlavery]

Kentucky Senate/House Concurrent Resolution 168 (HCR168)
http://www.examiner.com/x-3747-Louisville-City-Hall-Examiner~y2009m2d26-Kentuckys-new-sovereignty-resolution

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:C_UZPA5Ni6QJ:www.lrc.ky.gov/record/09RS/HC168/bill.doc+HCR+168&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

This is the html version of the file http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/09RS/HC168/bill.doc.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

UNOFFICIAL COPY AS OF 0/0/00 09 REG. SESS. 09 RS BR 1602

UNOFFICIAL COPY AS OF 0/0/00 09 REG. SESS. 09 RS BR 1602

    A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION claiming sovereignty over powers not granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution; serving notice to the federal government to cease mandates beyond its authority; and stating Kentucky's position that federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of loss of federal funding should be prohibited or repealed.
    WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."; and
    WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and
    WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the state; and
    WHEREAS, today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and
    WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
    WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 4 of the United States Constitution states that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government..." and the Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."; and
    WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and
    WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States;
    NOW, THEREFORE,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:

    âSection 1.   The Commonwealth of Kentucky hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
    âSection 2.   This Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
    âSection 3.   It is the position of the Commonwealth of Kentucky that all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions, or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.
    âSection 4.   The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall distribute a copy of this Resolution to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate of each state's legislature of the United States of America, and to each member of Kentucky's congressional delegation.
Page of 2

BR160200.100-1602 

Anybody know when they are going to vote on this thing?

[menace]

Here is the link to Idaho's

http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2009/HJM004.htm

[Optimus]

KANSAS SOVEREIGNTY DECLARATION (11FEB2009) SCR1609

http://my.1club.fm/profiles/blogs/kansas-sovereignty-declaration

Senate Concurrent Resolution No.1609
By Senator Pilcher-Cook
http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-bills/searchKeyword.do;jsessionid=F2C1EA6E037CF798D9E48DB17B6648C9
(In the bill number search box enter the bill number 1609 and it will result with the bill in pdf format.)

A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or repealed; and directing distribution.

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States reads as follows:
‘‘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.
’’; and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and

WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, Today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, Many federal laws are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of the United States of America and each sovereign state in the Union of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal government may not usurp; and

WHEREAS, Article IV, Section 4 says, ‘‘The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government’’, and the Ninth Amendment states that ‘‘The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people’’; and

WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v United States, 112 S. Ct.
2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.

Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of Kansas, the House of Representatives concurring therein: That the State of Kansas hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States;

Be it further resolved: That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as out agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers;

Be it further resolved: That all compulsory federal legislation which directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanc- tions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be pro-hibited or repealed; and

Be it further resolved: That a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state’s legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the Kansas Congressional Delegation..

[JTCoyoté]

Then there is this from "freedomrik"...

I need All Patriot and Truthers from NC to write their NC reps. and urge them to pass HR 571
Find contact info for your Reps at http://www.ncleg.net/GIS/RandR07/Home.html

Help me revive this Resolution.........

North Carolina's 1995 10th Amendment State Sovereignty Resolution



GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA

SESSION 1995

H2

HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 571

Committee Substitute Favorable 5/3/95

–––––––––––––––––––-

Sponsors:

–––––––––––––––––––-

Referred to:

–––––––––––––––––––-

March 28, 1995

 

A JOINT RESOLUTION DEMANDING THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CEASE AND DESIST MANDATES THAT ARE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF ITS CONSTITUTIONALLY DELEGATED POWERS AND HONORING THE MEMORY OF RICHARD DOBBS SPAIGHT, WILLIAM BLOUNT, AND HUGH WILLIAMSON.

Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

"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."; and

Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the United States Constitution and no more; and

Whereas, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and

Whereas, in 1995, the states are in fact treated as agents of the federal government; and

Whereas, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

Whereas, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

Whereas, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the United States Constitution; and

Whereas, Richard Dobbs Spaight, William Blount, and Hugh Williamson were among North Carolina's delegates to the federal convention in 1787 and signed the United States Constitution on behalf of North Carolina; and

Whereas, Richard Dobbs Spaight was a member of the Continental Congress from 1783 to 1785; a member of the House of Commons of the Assemblies of 1779, 1781, 1782, 1783, 1786-87, 1792; a member of the Senate of the Assemblies of 1801 and 1802; Speaker of the House of Commons of the Assembly of 1785; Governor, as chosen by the legislature, from 1792-95; and a member of the United States House of Representatives in the Fifth and Sixth Congresses; and

Whereas, William Blount was a member of the Continental Congress, elected in 1782, 1784, and 1785; a member of the House of Commons of the Assemblies of 1780, 1783, 1784, 1784-85, 1788, 1789, 1801, 1802; a member of the Senate of the Assembly of 1806; and Speaker of the North Carolina House of Commons of the Assembly of 1784-85; and

Whereas, Hugh Williamson was a member of the Continental Congress, elected in 1782, 1784, and 1787; a member of the House of Commons of the Assemblies of 1782 and 1785; and a member of the First Congress of the United States House of Representatives;

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:

Section 1.  That the State of North Carolina claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all other powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution.

Sec. 2.  That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as the State of North Carolina's agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.

Sec. 3.  That the General Assembly hereby honors the life and memory of Richard Dobbs Spaight, William Blount, and Hugh Williamson for their service and contributions to this State and the United States and for their signing of the Constitution of our United States.

Sec. 4.  The Secretary of State shall transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate of each state legislature of the United States, and each Senator and Representative in the Congress of the United States from North Carolina.

Sec. 5.  This resolution is effective upon ratification.

JTCoyoté

"I am absolutely opposed to a national ID card.
This is a total contradiction of what a free society
is all about. The purpose of government is to protect
the secrecy and the privacy of all individuals, not the
secrecy of government. We don't need a national ID card."
~Ron Paul

[jflack]

Ok, this guy makes me sick.  I almost puked all over my computer screen.

Why the Tenth Amendment "Nullification" Arguments Against the Stimulus Bill Are Sheer Folly – and Why It's Disturbing that So Many Years After the Civil War, They Are Still Being Raised
By EDWARD LAZARUS
 
Thursday, March 12, 2009
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/lazarus/20090312.html

In this space, over the span of many years, I have written often about the long shadow that the Civil War, now more than 140 years behind us, still casts over contemporary lawmaking. The events of this week have brought fresh reminders of how true this is – how legal arguments that one might have thought had been safely buried under the bloody fields of Gettysburg are now being resurrected as if unsullied by a Confederate history and how, no matter how much progress we make as a nation, old ideas – and bad ones – still find their way forward in difficult times.

In the wake of the passage of the stimulus bill, it was widely reported that a bevy of states, many of them so-called "red" states, entertained legislation purporting to declare the federal legislation "unconstitutional" – as, allegedly, a violation of rights guaranteed the states under the Tenth Amendment – and asserting a right of individual states to ignore the law. Stripped of the rhetoric about the immorality of the stimulus package, what these states are proposing is plain and simple a constitutional scheme under which states have a right to "nullify" any federal laws that they deem to intrude on their prerogatives.

It is difficult to see where the legislators who have drafted these states' rights bills find this "nullification" authority in the Tenth Amendment. That Amendment simply states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Nowhere in this somewhat opaque text does the Constitution vest states with the right to unilaterally pick and choose what federal laws to obey based on their own conceptions of the Constitution. And if it somehow did, our system would simply fall apart. Federal power either overrules state power – as the Supremacy Clause dictates – or is merely advisory, which is untenable.

But if these state actions have only dubious grounding in the Constitution, they do have long and obvious historical roots – and shameful ones.

The Shameful History Behind the Nullification-Power Claims We Are Hearing Now

Back in 1828, then-Vice President John C. Calhoun gave voice to the doctrine of "nullification" in his fury over the federal tariffs that were then being imposed on states by the federal government. Like the modern-day nullifiers, Calhoun read the Tenth Amendment as providing states with a veto over disfavored federal legislation, to wit, a tariff too high for South Carolina's views of what was proper.
As Calhoun famously framed the idea: "That the sovereign powers delegated are divided between the General and State Governments ... it would seem impossible to deny to the States the right of deciding on the infractions of their powers, and the proper remedy to be applied for their correction." And on this theory, a South Carolina convention passed the "Ordinance of Nullification," which declared the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 to be null and void.

The President at the time obtained legislation to coerce compliance from South Carolina, including the use of force if that proved necessary. Under this threat, a compromise was eventually reached, whereby South Carolina obtained a lower tariff rate but repealed the Ordinance of Nullification.

The nullification doctrine did not die there, however. Nullification was born with the issue of slavery in mind. Southerners conceived of the doctrine as a potential tactic for fighting any federal attempts to abolish slavery – claiming that they could just refuse to enforce any such law. And beyond serving as a potential tactic for trying to preserve slavery, the concept underlying nullification – the idea that states could act in defiance of the federal government – paved the way for the even more radical concept of secession. Indeed, it was no coincidence that South Carolina, which birthed nullification (and which is jumping on the nullification bandwagon again now), was the first state to secede 30 years later and to set us upon each other in the fight for the survival of the Union.

At Best, Invoking Nullifcation Is Simply Grandstanding; At Worst, It Is a Troubling Sign of Turmoil and Discontent in the Face of a Frightening Recession

It is hard to know what to make of the fact that a bunch of opportunistic politicians are now holding out a tarnished artifact of constitutional history as a serious interpretation of the Constitution and of our national structure. Perhaps this can be written off as mere grandstanding – symbolic gestures by politicians who are hoping to tap into a potential backlash against the inevitable growth of the federal government as it comes to grips with our economic crisis.

But nullification is a deeply pernicious idea. It strikes at the core of the constitutional bargain that was struck after the Revolution when the Articles of Confederation failed – the working principle that we are all in this together and that the purpose of the federal government, a government in which every state is represented, is to calibrate the shared sacrifices that all of us will have to bear to preserve the country's economic vitality and help it prosper. In place of this unifying idea, nullification substitutes the easy way out – by making the claim that we must all be allowed to judge our own contribution and take our own path, no matter how much our cross-purposes and divergent interests might undermine the common good.

To state the obvious, however, we do not live in ordinary times and the strains on the national fabric are increasing. A number of states already face double-digit employment – and that grim figure does not count those who are underemployed or have given up looking for a job. Unemployment nationwide will probably soon reach a comparable level. Overall, the risk of social unrest and the need for collective action to weather the economic storm are both rising.

In the face of this, it is not just wrong, but outright irresponsible to talk of nullification, much less, as actor Chuck Norris (Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's celebrity sidekick) did today, to announce that he could readily imagine Texas seceding from the Union "sooner than we think" and that there would be "thousands of cell groups" united in solidarity around the country.

This all sounds like a very bad movie – but we need to be vigilant that this vision of how we should govern ourselves remains more fiction than fact.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edward Lazarus, a FindLaw columnist, writes about, practices, and teaches law in Los Angeles. A former federal prosecutor, he is the author of two books -- most recently, Closed Chambers: The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court.

[lord edward coke]

Stimulus raises state sovereignty issuesStory Highlights
GOP state lawmakers pressing the issue of state sovereignty

They say the federal government has overstepped its bounds

Oklahoma state senator: Stimulus package "immoral and unconscionable"

Lawmakers are introducing bills in the states that invoke the Tenth Amendment



By Lauren Kornreich
CNN

     
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Republican lawmakers from more than 20 states across the country are willing to take federal funding, but only on their terms.


Some state lawmakers are pushing for sovereignty from the federal government.

 From Montana to South Carolina, lawmakers in mostly red states have pushed ahead with measures calling for state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment, saying the federal government has overstepped its bounds with the stimulus package. The states are calling for the right to ignore laws they deem unconstitutional.

Oklahoma state Sen. Randy Brogdon, a Republican and the first to introduce this type of legislation last year, originally pursued it because he thought then-President Bush and Congress exceeded their authority with the Real ID Act, which required states to include certain information on driver's licenses.

He called the stimulus package "immoral and unconscionable" and said it was "the final straw that broke the financial back of America."

Brogdon's bill passed the state Senate on Wednesday and the state House approved a similar measure. The office of lead House sponsor Republican Rep. Charles Key said it is confident a joint resolution will get through.

The legislation would be binding. So, if the governor signs it, it theoreticallly would allow Oklahoma to ignore laws that are not "enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution," as stated in the Tenth Amendment.

Obama touts job creation from stimulus plan
Where the stimulus money is going
"I'm sick and tired of Congress overreaching and underachieving," Brogdon said. He added, "If we have an opportunity to salvage freedom and protect sovereignty, it has to be done at the state level."

Similar legislation is moving along in South Carolina. The bill already passed in the state House and a state Senate panel approved it on Tuesday.

Republican state Rep. Lee Bright said he chose to sponsor the South Carolina measure because he thinks the stimulus package grants the federal government more power than the Constitution allows.

"The federal government is living beyond the scope that the Constitution grants it and states should put it on notice," Bright said. "I haven't been pleased for some time with what the federal government gets involved in, but it came to a head with the stimulus bill."

The Republican lead sponsor of the bill in Virginia, state Rep. Christopher Peace, said his state has used only a small portion of the money allocated in the stimulus package. He said local officials are the best managers of Virginia's budget and the federal government shouldn't interfere with how the state chooses to spend its money.

"I'm not saying we don't benefit from some of the money, but it's important to question what are the roles and boundaries, and ask if Congress is exceeding them," Peace said. "Our representatives in the federal government represent the same people we do and they need to work to keep the government small and limited and efficient."

All the bills invoke the Tenth Amendment, which states that "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."

Most are symbolic measures and none have passed yet, but local officials are hoping to send a message to Washington to back off.

Many states are criticizing the stimulus package, while others are trying to assert authority over other issues, like abortion in Missouri and exempting firearms from federal regulations in Montana.

Many of the bills include a provision that once the bill is passed, a copy will be sent to President Obama and Congress.

"It's time to send a message to Congress that we're sovereign," said state Rep. Judy Burges, an Arizona Republican. "We have many states doing this and if you have enough sending the same message, they're going to have to step back and take a look at what they're doing
  http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/06/states.fed/

[JTCoyoté]

Tennessee is on board as well, thanks to "Route24" for the heads up, and "jofortruth", who is doing yeomans research on this and dug up the actual document... http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=6267  
Check it out...


Tennessee: HJR0108 (Lynn) Filed for Introduction 02/18/2009
http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HJR0108
http://susan-lynn.blogspot.com/2009/02/hjr-108-state-sovereignty.html
http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/billinfo/BillSummaryArchive.aspx?BillNumber=HJR0104
&ga=106
 

QUOTE 
*HJR 0108 by *Lynn, Maggart, Hawk, Niceley, Swafford, Campfield, Haynes,
Watson, Dunn, Eldridge, Coley, Bell, Floyd, Mumpower, Cobb J, Casada, Hill,
Dennis, Evans, Rich. 
Memorials, Congress - Urges Congress to recognize Tennessee's sovereignty under
the tenth amendment to the Constitution. -
 
QUOTE 
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 108
By Lynn
 
A RESOLUTION to affirm Tennessee's sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to
the Constitution of the United States and to demand the federal government halt its
practice of assuming powers and of imposing mandates upon the states for
purposes not enumerated by the Constitution of the United States.

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as
follows: "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"; and
 
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being
that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and
 
WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the
federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states;
and
 
WHEREAS, today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the
federal government; and
 
WHEREAS, many powers assumed by the federal government and federal mandates
are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States; and
 
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United
States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the
legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and
 
WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now
pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the
Constitution of the United States; now, therefore,
 
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ONE
HUNDRED
SIXTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, THE SENATE
CONCURRING, that we hereby affirm Tennessee's sovereignty under the Tenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise
enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United
States. We also demand the federal government to halt and reverse its practice of
assuming powers and of imposing mandates upon the states for purposes not
enumerated by the Constitution of the United States.
 
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a committee of conference and correspondence
be
appointed by the Speaker of the House and of the Senate, which shall have as its
charge to communicate the preceding resolution to the legislatures of the several
states, to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship
and to call for a joint working group between the states to enumerate the abuses of
authority by the federal government and to seek repeal of the assumption of powers
and the imposed mandates.
 
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be transmitted
to
the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the
Speaker and the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, and to each
member of Tennessee's Congressional delegation.
 
***********************************************************************
(Another Bill HJR 0104 by *Campfield, Rich has also been introduced)

JTCoyoté

"A popular government without popular information
or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to
a farce, or a tragedy, or perhaps both."
~James Madison 

[plantop14]

State of Texas 10th Amendment Resolution:

 81R5789 MMS-F
 
  By: Creighton H.C.R. No. 50
 
 
   CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
          WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the 
   United States reads as follows: "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"; 
   and
          WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of 
   federal power as being that specifically granted by the 
   Constitution of the United States and no more; and
          WHEREAS, The scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment 
   means that the federal government was created by the states 
   specifically to be an agent of the states; and
          WHEREAS, Today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated 
   as agents of the federal government; and
          WHEREAS, Many federal laws are directly in violation of the 
   Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
          WHEREAS, The Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of 
   the United States of America and each sovereign state in the Union 
   of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal 
   government may not usurp; and
          WHEREAS, Section 4, Article IV, of the Constitution says, 
   "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a 
   Republican Form of Government," and the Ninth Amendment states that 
   "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not 
   be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people"; 
   and
          WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has ruled in New 
   York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that congress may not 
   simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the 
   states; and
          WHEREAS, A number of proposals from previous administrations 
   and some now pending from the present administration and from 
   congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States; 
   now, therefore, be it
          RESOLVED, That the 81st Legislature of the State of Texas 
   hereby claim sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the 
   Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise 
   enumerated and granted to the federal government by the 
   Constitution of the United States; and, be it further
          RESOLVED, That this serve as notice and demand to the federal 
   government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective 
   immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these 
   constitutionally delegated powers; and, be it further
          RESOLVED, That all compulsory federal legislation that 
   directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal 
   penalties or sanctions or that requires states to pass legislation 
   or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and, be it 
   further
          RESOLVED, That the Texas secretary of state forward official 
   copies of this resolution to the president of the United States, to 
   the speaker of the house of representatives and the president of the 
   senate of the United States Congress, and to all the members of the 
   Texas delegation to the congress with the request that this 
   resolution be officially entered in the Congressional Record as a 
   memorial to the Congress of the United States of America.

[plantop14]

My state Senator replied with a letter regarding my concerns:

Dear Mr. Moore:

Thank you for your email message regarding H.C.R. 50 affirming that the State of Texas claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government.

I will support H.C.R. 50 when it comes to the Senate for a vote. I appreciate hearing from you on this resolution.

Please feel free to contact my office at any time.

Sincerely,

Tommy Williams

[jofortruth]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13407482/10th-Amendment-Sovereignty-Movement-Legislation-Per-State

[Optimus]

Pennsylvania House Resolution 95
http://samrohrer.com/uploads/10th-Amend-Res-22.pdf

Rep. Sam Rohrer introduces states' rights resolution
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20283172&BRD=2149&PAG=461&dept_id=365715&rfi=6
By: Jacob Speicher 03/19/2009

MORGANTOWN - State representative Sam Rohrer, joined by state senator Mike Folmer, held a rally in the capitol rotunda Monday to encourage support for his 10th Amendment Resolution.

"The quiet consolidation of power by the federal government is a threat to all citizens because too much power in too few hands ends in tyranny," said Rohrer.

The 10th Amendment relegates all authority not described specifically in the Constitution to the states. Rohrer wants to reaffirm this authority.

Rohrer points to abuses of power by the federal government that threaten states' sovereignty especially when it comes to funding.

"Basically, you have a tax payer in Pennsylvania who sends their tax dollar to Washington D.C., and the federal government uses that tax dollar to bribe state lawmakers to expand a program that otherwise would be too costly to operate," Rohrer said.

Adding, "With the federal government providing incentives for states to overspend, is it any wonder so many states are facing budgetary problems?"

[stymo1]

We ran into a roadblock of sorts here in Kansas.

We need help getting our reps to take this seriously.


http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=94281.0;topicseen

[70983]

NEW HAMPSHIRE DECLARES SOVEREIGNTY

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html

HCR 6 – AS INTRODUCED

2009 SESSION

09-0274

09/01

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 6

A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

SPONSORS: Rep. Itse, Rock 9; Rep. Ingbretson, Graf 5; Rep. Comerford, Rock 9; Sen. Denley, Dist 3

COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs

ANALYSIS

This house concurrent resolution affirms States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

09-0274

09/01

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine

A RESOLUTION affirming States’ rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in congress assembled; and

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 2, Article 1 declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New Hampshire; and

Whereas the State of New Hampshire when ratifying the Constitution for the United States of America recommended as a change, “First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised;” and

Whereas the other States that included recommendations, to wit Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia, included an identical or similar recommended change; and

Whereas these recommended changes were incorporated as the ninth amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people, and the tenth amendment, 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, to the Constitution for the United States of America; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:

That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and

That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “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,” therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and

That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that “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;” and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press:” thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and

That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” and “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof,” goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction; and

That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories; and

That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court; and

That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:

I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and

That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.

JTCoyoté

"All government without the consent of the governed
is the very definition of slavery."
~Jonathan Swift

The part that I put in bold in that quote completely ruins the entire resolution, and i bring that up because my state has a copy of this resolution pending as we speak.  This makes me weary of COINTELPRO, advocating secession at the slightest infringement of our sovereign Constitution.  I figured of all people JTCoyote would be the one to address this.

http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2009_10/fulltext/hr470.htm

[jofortruth]

Many do think other groups (maybe COINTELPRO included) are pushing for secession. This is another separate movement.

The 10th Amendment State Sovereignty movement is about telling the fed to "Cease and desist" unfunded mandates (and other issues) and basically usurping their Constitutional powers. They are NOT pushing for secession.

So, there are two movements out there to confuse everyone.

Isn't that right, JT?

[jofortruth]

Update to List of States joining Sovereignty Movement:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13407482/10th-Amendment-State-Sovereignty-Movement-Legislation-Per-State

Ohio has a bill # now
Wisconsin Rep is considering a resolution
Among others

[70983]

Many do think other groups (maybe COINTELPRO included) are pushing for secession. This is another separate movement.

The 10th Amendment State Sovereignty movement is about telling the fed to "Cease and desist" unfunded mandates (and other issues) and basically usurping their Constitutional powers. They are NOT pushing for secession.

So, there are two movements out there to confuse everyone.

Isn't that right, JT?

But you can't deny what that last paragraph in the New Hampshire resolution contained, which was passed, and Georgia has a bill with that paragraph in it pending as well.  The wording cannot be construed as anything but advocating secession.  Sure, the resolution is a great bill, but that one paragraph ruins the entire thing.

[Revolt426]

You ever read about the Civil War and Lincoln? The British were responsible for the god damn secessions.

Albert Pike was a f**king Confederate General.

The British have been aiming for breaking the US up into itty bitty pieces since Aaron Burr attempted a coup de tat and was tried for Treason.

They WANT secession.

[jofortruth]

I agree with you guys, there is a group pushing for SECESSION, and these are the JERKS. Maybe that's partly why the NH bill didn't pass? I wonder

The good guys are those TELLING THE GOVERNMENT TO STOP OVERREACHING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS, and who are simply taking their power back as a Sovereign State.

[Irobot]

Combat vet and patriot Guy Razer has started a State Sovereignty group site and is looking for state leaders. Would you like to participate and or help promote it here?

Other than the "introductions" section of the forum, I am not sure how best to promote this idea.

Here is the site.
http://statesstand.ning.com/

Let me know your thoughts and any suggestions you may have.

Thank you in advance. James