Tenth Amendment Remembered

...from Tenth Amendment Center Article II of the Constitution defines the role and qualifications of the president. The Constitution delegates specific powers and responsibilities to the executive branch including the power of appointment, the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of Congress, the veto power, etc. These specific powers delegated to the executive are relatively clear and unambiguous. But a question remains: does the president enjoy other non-specified powers as chief executive? The so-called “vesting clause” leaves this question up for debate. “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” [Emphasis added] What exactly does “executive power” mean in this context? Is it limited by the specific powers listed, or does it include a broader slate of “implied” powers? Many modern legal scholars claim this clause grants broad, unspecified “executive” authority to the president. They point to the difference in wor

...from Tenth Amendment Center In  Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam , decided Thursday, the Supreme Court (Per Justice Alito, writing for himself, Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh) held that the writ of habeas corpus didn’t protect Mr. Thuraissigiam, who sought to challenge DHS’s rejection of his asylum claim.  Josh Blackman comments  here : The majority required the Thuraissigiam to identify a specific case that supports his claim for relief. A close analogy is not enough. Despite pages of rhetoric, the dissent is unable to cite a single pre-1789 habeas case in which a court ordered relief that was  anything like what respondent seeks here . The dissent instead contends that “the Suspension Clause inquiry does not require a close (much less precise) factual match with historical habeas precedent,” and then discusses cases that are  not even close to this one . In dissent, Justice Sotomayor writes that  Boumediene  does not require such a close historical f

...from Tenth Amendment Center There’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the constitutional structure that opens the door to all kinds of mischief. I’m talking about the misguided notion that the Constitution “gives us our rights” and empowers the government to “protect our rights.” A federal judge’s opinion in a recent coronavirus lockdown case serves as a good example. District Court Judge John Mendez recently held that California Gov. Gavin Newsom had the authority to ban church assemblies in the interest of public health. Pastor Jonathan Duncan brought suit after police entered his church during a service and warned that the 30 or so worshipers were violating the governor’s order. According to the Los Angeles Times , “Police posted a notice on the building that its nonessential use created a public nuisance. San Joaquin County health officials then warned the church’s landlord, Bethel Open Bible Church, it could face a misdemeanor charge if it allowed assemblies to continue.”

...from Tenth Amendment Center Had the Declaration of Independence been written today, it would have rendered its signers extremists or terrorists, resulting in them being placed on a government watch list, targeted for surveillance of their activities and correspondence, and potentially arrested, held indefinitely, stripped of their rights and labeled enemy combatants. This is no longer the stuff of speculation and warning. In fact, Attorney General William Barr recently announced  plans to target, track and surveil “anti-government extremists” and preemptively nip in the bud any “threats” to  public safety and the rule of law . It doesn’t matter that the stated purpose of Barr’s anti-government extremist task force is to  investigate dissidents  on the far right (the “boogaloo” movement) and far left (antifa, a loosely organized anti-fascist group) who have been accused of instigating violence and disrupting peaceful protests. Boogaloo and Antifa have given the government the

...from Tenth Amendment Center Today in 1776, Patrick Henry was inaugurated as Virginia’s first governor. The event marked the first time in history where a republican governor took office under a constitution written and ratified by representatives of the people. By June of the same year, civil strife had been brewing for some time. Virginia had kicked out its royal governor, Lord Dunmore. In the midst of conflict with Britain, the colony sent delegates to Philadelphia, in a convention that became known a s the Second Continental Congress. As his country’s most persuasive orator and most popular politician, Henry’s selection to the office seemed like an obvious move. When it came time to institute a republican constitution, George Mason took the leading role in drafting the document. Thomas Jefferson, who was deeply interested in this issue, wrote desperately from Philadelphia, requesting that the government find someone to relieve him in time so that he could contribute to the

...from Tenth Amendment Center Under Article IV, Sec. 3, US Constitution, Congress has the power to admit new States into the Union. For a list of States and when admitted, see  this wiki list . Note that the new States were “colonies” or “territories” – or as with Vermont and Texas, “independent Republics” – before they were admitted into the Union as “States”.  That is highly significant. The District of Columbia has an existing constitutional status as “the Seat of the Government of the United States” – see Article I, Section 8, next to last clause, US Constitution. In order to change the constitutional status of the District of Columbia  from  the “seat of government of the United States”  to  a “State”,  Article I, Section 8, next to last clause, must be amended pursuant to Article V, U.S. Constitution. Any pretended Act of Congress which purports to confer statehood on the District of Columbia would be totally and blatantly unconstitutional. Publius Huldah June 29,

...from Tenth Amendment Center RALEIGH , N.C. (June 29, 2020) – Last Thursday, the North Carolina House gave final approval to a bill that would help facilitate healthcare freedom outside of government insurance regulatory schemes. I bipartisan coalition of 11 representatives sponsored House Bill 471 ( H471 ). The legislation specifies that direct primary care agreements (sometimes called medical retainer agreements) do not constitute insurance, thereby freeing doctors from the onerous requirements and regulations under the state insurance code. Under the proposed law, “Primary care providers and their agents shall not be required to be licensed or certified under this Chapter to market, sell, or offer to sell direct primary care agreements.” The bill also includes provisions defining direct primary care agreements and establishing modest requirements. The House passed H471 by a 111-0 vote  in April The Senate approved the measure 46-0 on June 3 with a technical amendment. With

...from Tenth Amendment Center A document pulled from the BlueLeaks trove reveals the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center (NCRIC) collects automatic license plate reader (ALPR) information and stores it for up to a year, making it accessible to government agencies across the country. The Tenth Amendment Center has long suspected that fusion centers serve as surveillance data collection hubs. The NCRIC document confirms this and additionally reveals that the center owns surveillance technology it makes available to law enforcement agencies in its region. NCRIC is one of 78 fusion centers across the United States . Although states own and operate their fusion centers, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security facilitates and coordinates their activities. According to the DHS website, “The National Network of Fusion Centers is the hub of much of the two-way intelligence and information flow between the federal government and our State, Local, Tribal and Territorial (SLTT)

...from Tenth Amendment Center LANSING , Mich. (June 26, 2020) – On Wednesday, the Michigan House unanimously gave final approval to a resolution that will put a state constitutional amendment on the ballot to elevate the privacy of a person’s electronic communications and data to the same level as “persons, houses, papers and possessions.” Sen. Jim Runestad (R-White Lake) along with 27 cosponsors, introduced Senate Joint Resolution G ( SJRG ) on June 12, 2019. The resolution allows voters to consider an amendment to Article 1, Section 11 of the Michigan state constitution that would require the government to obtain a search warrant in order to access a person’s electronic data or electronic communication. If approved by voters, the amendment will add the following highlighted words to Article I Sec. 11 of the state constitution. Sec. 11. The person, houses, papers, and possessions,  ELECTRONIC DATA, AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS  of every person shall be secure from unreasonable

...from Tenth Amendment Center JACKSON , Miss. (June 26, 2020) – Yesterday, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves signed a bill into law that expands the sate’s “Right to Try” law. The new provisions will increase the number of patients eligible for experimental treatments and allow patients to access stem cell treatments not yet given final approval by the FDA, nullifying some agency regulations in effect. A Republican and two Democrats sponsored Senate Bill 2830 ( SB2830 ). Mississippi enacted Right to Try in 2015 and expanded its provisions the following year . SB2830 expands it further, making patients with “traumatic injuries” eligible for experimental treatments under the law. It also adds adult autologous mesenchymal stem cells to the list of experimental treatments covered under the act. The Senate passed SB2830 50-0 back in March. The House approved the measure 114-0 on June 12. With Gov. Reeves’ signature, the new law went into immediate effect. BUILDING AGAINST FDA RESTRICTIO

...from Tenth Amendment Center Celebrating the Tenth Amendment Center’s 14 year anniversary today – Michael Boldin goes through some of the biggest things he learned while dedicating his life to supporting the Constitution and liberty. Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: June 26, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spotify | RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives Subscribe and Review on iTunes State of the Nullification Movement Report Jefferson to William Johnson (12 June 1823) Madison to Henry Lee (25 June 1824) John Adams, Boston Gazette (29 Aug 1763) Patrick Henry vs the Stamp Act Jefferson to Madison (17 Nov 1798) Winning for Liberty: The Story of “Small Things Grow Great by Concord” ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES Watch on LBRY Watch on Brighteon Watch on BitTube Watch on Bitchute Watch on Twitch.tv Watch on Periscope Watch on Facebook FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC: Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/ Email N

...from Tenth Amendment Center Here’s an ugly truth we all need to come to terms with: the Supreme Court does not protect your rights. The Supreme Court is part of the government. First and foremost — government protects itself. Oh, you may get a few crumbs thrown your way from time to time — enough to keep you married to the system. But if you look back over time, you’ll find that the SCOTUS almost always expands government power at the expense of your liberty. You’ve probably heard a lot about “qualified immunity” for cops in recent weeks. Fixing it is one of the most common-sense reforms that could be instituted to rein in police excessive force. Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that shields cops from liability for actions taken in the line of duty unless they violate rights “clearly established” by existing judicial precedent. No statute exists granting qualified immunity. Federal courts made this up out of thin air and have applied it to every law enforcement officer