Tenth Amendment Remembered

...from Tenth Amendment Center During the 2016 election cycle, I was told over and over again that I needed to vote for Donald Trump to “protect the Second Amendment.” As it turns out, Trump is worse than Obama, at least on two major metrics. The Trump administration has ramped up enforcement of unconstitutional federal gun control every single year. Yes – Trump is more aggressively enforcing gun control than gun-grabbing Democrat Barack Obama. You can see the numbers HERE . Not only that, Trump did something Obama didn’t do – implement new federal gun control with his bump stock ban. And he bragged about it! During  a public appearance in 2019 , President Donald Trump proudly reminded us about his gun control credentials, bragging that his administration implemented new gun control and has conducted more enforcement actions than anyone in history.   “At my direction, the DOJ banned bump stocks. Last year we prosecuted  a record number of firearms offenses .” No...

...from Tenth Amendment Center The purpose of journalism is to uncover truth – especially uncomfortable truth – and to publish it for the benefit of society. In a free society, we must be informed of the criminal acts carried out by governments in the name of the people. Throughout history, journalists have uncovered the many ways governments lie, cheat, and steal – and the great lengths they will go to keep the people from finding out. Great journalists like Seymour Hersh, who reported to us the tragedy of the Mai Lai Massacre and the horrors that took place at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, are essential. Ten years ago last week, Julian Assange’s Wikileaks organization published an exposé of US government wrongdoing on par with the above Hersh bombshell stories. Publication of the “Iraq War Diaries” showed us all the brutality of the US attack on Iraq. It told us the truth about the US invasion and occupation of that country. This was no war of defense against a nat...

...from Tenth Amendment Center On October 25, 1774, the first organized and public women’s political protest in American history. Organized primarily by Penelope Barker, 51 women signed a statement of protest vowing to give up tea and boycott other British products “until such time that all acts which tend to enslave our Native country shall be repealed.” Path to Liberty: October 26, 2020 Subscribe: Apple | Spotify | Podbean | Google | Stitcher | TuneIn | RSS | More Platforms Here SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives An Early Bill of Rights: Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress Continental Association The Tar Heel Tea Party that Wasn’t First North Carolina Provincial Congress Treasonous Tea: The Edenton Tea Party of 1774 Introductory Letter and Resolution published in Morning Chronicle A London Lad on the “Edenton ladies” Dawe Political Cartoon ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES Watch on LBRY Watch on Facebook Watch on Bitchute Watch on Twitch.tv ...

...from Tenth Amendment Center MADISON, Wisc. (Oct. 26, 2020) – An ordinance proposed in the Madison City Council would ban the government use of facial recognition technology in the city. The growing movement to prohibit the use of facial recognition at the state and local levels could hinder the operation of a growing national facial recognition network. Alds. Max Prestigiacomo and Rebecca Kemble introduced the proposed ordinance. It would “ban the use of any automated or semi-automated process that assists in identifying or verifying an individual, or in capturing information about an individual, based on the physical characteristics of an individual’s face.” The proposed ordinance includes some exceptions. It would allow the use of evidence relating to the investigation of a specific crime that may have been generated from a face surveillance system, provided the evidence was not generated by or at the request of any department. It would also allow the use of facial recognitio...

...from Tenth Amendment Center Some people say nullification can’t work because the federal government is too big and powerful. They’re wrong. Most of us nullify every single every day. In practice, nullification is really a numbers game. The government doesn't have anywhere near the resources to enforce all its so-called "laws," regulations, and mandates. @mmaharrey10th pic.twitter.com/zrWOq38owH — TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) October 23, 2020 There are two definitions of nullification. One is legal, the other, practical. When we talk about nullification as a strategy, we generally mean the practical definition. A law remains on the books but it is unenforceable or simply no longer has any practical effect. For Further Reading Nullification Overview The Blueprint: James Madison’s Advice The post Nullification: It Works! first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center Blog . Mike Maharrey October 25, 2020 at 03:12PM

...from Tenth Amendment Center On Oct. 10, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden claimed that nominating and potentially approving Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court during election season was “not constitutional.” You might think Biden knows what he’s talking about. Trained as a lawyer, he served a long tenure in the Senate and eight years as vice president. For eight years as well, he chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Senate committee most involved in constitutional issues. During all this time, the Constitution was the source of Biden’s power and a rule book governing his job. Keep in mind that the Constitution is not a particularly long document. It’s not too much to expect a member of the Senate, and especially of the Judiciary Committee, to be familiar with it. On Oct. 15, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) called the Barrett nomination and approval process “illegitimate”—that is, illegal. Leahy is another lawyer who has been in the Senate for many years....

...from Tenth Amendment Center Can you imagine a Dallas Cowboy football player refereeing a game between the Cowboys and the Giants? Well, this is exactly the kind of scenario you get when you ask the Supreme Court to limit the federal government. Going to the federal government to limit the power of the federal government is really bad strategy. @mmaharrey10th #SCOTUS #constitution #liberty #10thAmendment #supremecourt pic.twitter.com/YrKHIcxDHx — TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) October 22, 2020 For Further Reading Who Made the Supreme Court King? No, the U.S. Supreme Court Will Not Save Us The Incorporation Doctrine Has Given the Supreme Court Nearly Unlimited Power Bigger Problem Underlies Supreme Court Fight The post The Supreme Court Is a Biased Referee first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center Blog . Mike Maharrey October 23, 2020 at 03:24PM