“Nullification is the rightful remedy” Thomas Jefferson
Nullification: We Have The Authority
By de Andréa, Opinion Editorialist
for ‘THE BOTTOM LINE’:
for ‘THE BOTTOM LINE’:
Published November 10, 2015
I have written several articles about the sovereign authority of the states to Nullify unconstitutional Federal laws. YOU CAN READ SOME OF THEM HERE.
Some American counties are moving to defy and nullify the totalitarian Supreme Courts so-called rulings!
It seems that several counties in Tennessee are standing fast to uphold Biblical marriage against the Supreme Court's illegal ruling to redefine it to include sodomites and all sexual perversion.
The illegal and unconstitutional ruling of the Nazi-like supreme court regarding marriage this past summer was not only illegal, but a complete infringement upon the Constitution and the united States of America, led by none other than the Harvard’s queen of perversion Fabian Communist, Justice Elena Kagan.
First let me make ‘this’ perfectly clear: the Supreme Court nor any other court for that matter, cannot legally rule anything. (Separation of Powers) They can legally offer “OPINIONS” that’s all! Any’ opinion of any’ court that is contrary to any’ law created by congress or any legislature is sent back to congress or legislature for reevaluation. Congress or legislature then chooses to ratify the opinion of the court, changes the law, or abolishes it, or…’ rejects the opinion completely. If none of this occurs, then the existing law stands. Guess what? None of that occurred, so even if the statute of DOMA is unconstitutional, it still stands, so the Defense Of Marriage Act is still the Law…and the truth is, ‘Same Sex Marriage’ is still against the law.
Article I Section I of the United States Constitution: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
Note: All legislative powers means all power to make law is in the Congress. That’s ‘‘all the power’’ my friend!
Article III Section I, II, and III of the United States Constitution:
“The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.”
“The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.”
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.”
Question: Did you read anything in that part of the constitution that pertained to the Judiciary branch that said anything about the Courts making law, changing law, or abolishing law??? No you didn’t! The Supreme Court can only offer opinions of interpretation of the law.
The power of making law or amending law or the abolishment of a law lies exclusively with the legislatures, NOT THE COURTS.
That being said:
The most important thing to consider of course is that all legislative power in the federal jurisdiction is placed within the Congress. However, the issue of marriage is not within their authority to make law on.
Congress is NOT authorized to pass any law on any subject just because a majority in Congress think the law is a good idea! Instead, the areas in which Congress is authorized to act are strictly limited and defined (“enumerated”).
Second, the Judicial Branch does not have any authority to rule on the issue of marriage as their enumerated powers do not give them that jurisdiction either.
So the Issue of Marriage is actually left to the many states or to the people, according to the 10th 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. “
So what do we do about this dilemma? Since both the Congress and the Supreme Court have violated the Constitution and usurped their authority. Well believe it or not there is an app for that as they say. There are actually several legal/constitutional provisions for this as well.
Leading the charge against the illegal ruling of the Supreme Court, is the American Principle's Project.
"It cannot … be taken to have settled the law of the United States," said a statement by the American Principles Project.
"We call on all federal and state officeholders: To refuse to accept Obergefell as binding precedent for all but the specific plaintiffs in that case," read the statement. "To recognize the authority of states to define marriage, and the right of federal and state officeholders to act in accordance with those definitions. To pledge full and mutual legal and political assistance to anyone who refuses to follow Obergefell for constitutionally protected reasons. To open forthwith a broad and honest conversation on the means by which Americans may constitutionally resist and overturn the judicial usurpations evidence in Obergefell."
The project cited James Madison, who wrote, "The several departments being perfectly co-ordinate by the terms of their common commission, neither of them, it is evident, can pretend to an exclusive or superior right of settling the boundaries between their respective powers."
They also quoted Abraham Lincoln, who said, "Judicial decisions are of greater or less authority as precedents, according to circumstances. That this should be so, accords both with common sense, and the customary understanding of the legal profession." [If a decision] "had been made by the unanimous concurrence of the judges, and without any apparent partisan bias, and in accordance with legal public expectation, and with the steady practice of the departments throughout our history, and had been in no part, based on assumed historical facts which are not really true; or, if wanting in some of these, it had been before the court more than once, and had there been affirmed and re-affirmed through a course of years, it then might be, perhaps would be, factious, nay, even revolutionary, to not acquiesce in it as a precedent."
In Johnson County, officials voted "to affirm and go on record that Johnson County is vehemently opposed to the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell et al v. Hodges and supports the decision of any elected/appointed official challenging that unconstitutional decision."
In Greene County officials adopted a very similar statement that pointed out that "since this country's founding [states] have regulated and defined marriage without interference from the federal government or its courts."
In McMinn County, officials pointed out the text of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution "reserves all powers not explicitly delegated to the federal government to the people and the states."
The votes weren't close. Johnson County's was approved 15-0. McMinn's was 10-0 and in Greene, it was 17-2.
Other counties are also drawing up similar nullification resolutions, including McMinn County and Blount County. In fact, Blount County Commissioner Karen Miller
The project then stated:
“We stand with James Madison and Abraham Lincoln in recognizing that the Constitution is not whatever a majority of Supreme Court justices say it is.
We remind all officeholders in the United States that they are pledged to uphold the Constitution of the United States, not the will of five members of the Supreme Court.
We call on all federal and state officeholders:
To refuse to accept Obergefell as binding precedent for all but the specific plaintiffs in that case.
To recognize the authority of states to define marriage, and the right of federal and state officeholders to act in accordance with those definitions.
To pledge full and mutual legal and political assistance to anyone who refuses to follow Obergefell for constitutionally protected reasons.
To open forthwith a broad and honest conversation on the means by which Americans may constitutionally resist and overturn the judicial usurpations evident in Obergefell.”
While many in our culture are pushing for an Article V convention to stop federal tyranny (something Article V was never designed to do since words do not stop lawbreakers from breaking more laws), including out of control federal courts, nullification and interposition is the method advanced by the founders. It is the power of the states to do so since the D.C. government is their creature; the states are not the creature of the D.C.
Now if one can extrapolate the truth of this fact and apply it to past illegal so-called rulings of the Supreme Court, this country could get itself back on track to the real Constitutional Republic it once was. Roe v Wade comes to mind. It was just another court OPINION not a law.
THE BOTTOM LINE: Tell a lie long enough and if people accept it as truth, it becomes the truth.
Thanks for listening – de Andréa
Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list. It may be the only chance for your friends to hear the truth.
Copyright © 2014 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights Reserved - Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as source materials.