.

.

Tenth Amendment Center: Misapplying the Supremacy Clause

...from Tenth Amendment Center

The following post is excerpted from the script for Nullify: Season 1. Watch all the videos from this series at this link – and Become a member here to support the TAC.

If you discuss a state bill contrary to federal goals, some will claim it’s unconstitutional with just two words: “Supremacy clause.” But in many situations, the clause doesn’t even apply.

The original meaning of the Supremacy clause tells us that state laws must generally yield to conflicting federal laws made in pursuance of the constitution.

Even so, out of the hundreds of nullification bills filed in states in recent years, the supremacy clause only applies to a small handful.  The rest generally prohibit the use of state resources to enforce or effectuate federal laws and the supremacy clause doesn’t even apply.

Here’s the deal.

The feds have overextended themselves. As the National Governors Association pointed out, they rely on state-level support or enforcement to carry out “most federal programs,” So most modern nullification bills use the strategy of withdrawing support for them.

This is the strategy advised by James Madison and backed up by over 170 years of Supreme Court precedent holding that the federal government cannot require states to use resources or personnel to help the feds carry out their programs.

Known as the anti-commandeering doctrine, states can simply stop participating and leave enforcement to the feds, who don’t have the manpower to get the job done in the first place.  When states use this strategy, there’s simply no possibility of a supremacy clause conflict.

Think of it like a boycott.

A store can’t stay in business if people don’t shop there. But the store can’t force anyone to shop there either.

Today, most federal programs can’t stay in business without help from the states, and the supreme court has repeatedly supported the Constitutional framework that the feds can’t force the states to help them either.

It’s the federal government’s own problem that they’ve set up programs that rely on help from states to implement.

Refusing to help the federal government is smart strategy – it’s constitutional, it’s an easy legal argument, and it works.


Michael Boldin
September 23, 2017 at 12:49AM

Popular posts from this blog

Tenth Amendment Center: Modern Nullification: A Winning Policy

Image
...from Tenth Amendment Center Nullification is dead. At least that’s the opinion of Duke University Law School professor Ernest Young . But despite this emphatic epitaph, Young sees great potential for nullification as a tool to limit federal power. In a paper published in the Case Western Reserve Law Review , Young makes a strong case for nullification, highlighting state efforts that have effectively nullified federal marijuana prohibition. So, how can this be? How can nullification be simultaneously dead and buried, yet still a serve as a powerful tool to check federal overreach? The answer lies in the two distinct definitions of nullification. While “legal” nullification as laid out by John C. Calhoun may be dead, Young argues that nullification through non-cooperation, as recommended by James Madison in Federalist #46, remains a powerful means to confront overreaching federal authority. He even cites the Tenth Amendment Center’s definition of nullification – “any act or s
Read more

Tenth Amendment Center: Colorado Committee Passes Bill to Repeal High-Capacity Magazine Ban

Image
...from Tenth Amendment Center DENVER , Colo. (March 26, 2018) – Last week, a Colorado Senate committee passed a bill that would repeal state prohibitions on high capacity magazines as well as a magazine date stamp requirement. Passage would not only remove restrictions currently imposed on Coloradans, it would also foster an environment hostile to federal gun control. Sen. Owen Hill (R-Colorado Springs) introduced Senate Bill 52 ( SB52 ) on Jan. 10. The legislation would repeal the current law banning high-capacity magazines. Under Colorado state law, magazines that allow more than 15 rifle rounds or 25 shotgun shells are prohibited. Selling, transferring or selling such a magazine is a class 2 misdemeanor. Another statute requires a date stamp on all magazines produced in the state after 2013 when the law took effect. Senate Bill 52  would repeal both these statues, protecting the gun rights of Colorado residents. On March 19, the Senate State, Veterans, & Military Affairs C
Read more

Tenth Amendment Center: The Purge Ramps Up as Banking Institutions Get Involved: Good Morning Liberty 08-22-18

Image
...from Tenth Amendment Center On this episode of Good Morning Liberty, host Michael Boldin ( follow ) talks about Wells Fargo joining the purge, booting a state-level candidate in Florida for receiving donations from members of the marijuana industry. He also talks about how the Federal Reserve has been acting like the DEA’s guard dog by pushing for this kind of outcome for years, and a warning on deplatforming for progressives from the ACLU. SHOW LINKS Wells Fargo Cuts off Candidate Colorado Credit Union vs Federal Reserve Bitchute vs Stripe ACLU warning Quote of the Day FOLLOW TAC: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest Twitter: http://twitter.com/tenthamendment Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/ Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/ Michael
Read more