NDAA Nullification Passes Virginia Senate by a Veto-Proof 39-1 Vote






Today, the Virginia Senate took a firm stand in support of liberty, the Constitution for the United States, and the Constitution of Virginia by voting in favor of House Bill 1160 (HB1160), the “NDAA Nullification Act.”


The final vote was 39-1.


After a motion to recommit (delay until next year) went down to the wire before being rejected yesterday (report here), groups across the political spectrum activated in support of the legislation, which codifies in law that no agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia – including defense forces and national guard troops, will comply with or assist the federal government in any way under it’s newly claimed powers to arrest and detain without due process.



INTERNMENT: NEVER AGAIN
The bill’s primary sponsor, Delegate Bob Marshall, had this to say in support:
“During World War II, the federal government incarcerated tens of thousands of loyal Japanese Americans in the name of national security. By this bill, Virginia declares that it will not participate in similar modern-day efforts.
Even President Obama had questions about the bill, when he promised the American people that he would not use the unrestrained powers it granted him — but why should we trust any President with such powers?
There are moments in our history when our liberties hang in the balance. This is one of those moments. I urge the Senate…to lead the way in the nation to ensure that Virginia will not cooperate when the Federal Government strays off the reservation with laws that take away the civil liberties of our citizens.”

BRIDGING THE POLITICAL DIVIDE

Last Thursday, the Tenth Amendment Center, in partnership with the Bill of Rights Defense Committee and Demand Progress held a media conference with experts and legislators from across the political spectrum. On hand were a former Al Gore advisor and a former Reagan administration member. (full report here)
The message was resounding, and echoed by the Jr. Senator from Loudoun Virginia on the floor today, “Wherever you fall on the political spectrum, any law that passes congress that has those provisions should be a deep concern, and I hope that we can all agree on this one issue.”
While the bill doesn’t directly block federal agents from carrying out their new NDAA powers, this is part and parcel of a larger NDAA nullification campaign around the country. Currently 7 local governments have passed resolutions ranging from a denouncement of the federal act in three Colorado counties to requiring noncompliance with it in places like Fairfax, CA and Northampton, MA. And, 7 states are currently considering legislation like Virginia’s – all based off the model legislation provided by the Tenth Amendment Center, the Liberty Preservation Act.

THREE STEPS, MAYBE JUST TWO?

Here at the Tenth Amendment Center, we define nullification as “any act or set of acts which has as its end result a particular law being rendered null, void, or unenforceable in a specific area.” With that definition in mind, we see nullification of the new “kidnapping powers” of the NDAA as a multi-step process.
1. Education - awareness. This is where local and state resolutions come into play. When something is passed, even non-binding, it gets press coverage about the idea that the local and state people have a role to play in this.
2. Non-compliance – as just passed by the Virginia House and Senate, and being considered in various other states and local communities. The message? Your unconstitutional federal act is not welcome here!
Gandhi, Rosa Parks and others didn’t take it beyond there. We recognize that in almost every situation, the federal government relies on states being silent or even fully complicit. Information sharing, logistics, and even national guard troops carrying out orders are activities that could be asked of state and local governments. Could the feds still kidnap at that point if the state refuses compliance? Sure, “legally” nothing has changed. But if 10-15 states and a hundred or so counties and cities are making clear they will not comply and that they consider the act unconstitutional, it’s going to be much tougher for them, if not politically impossible, than if everybody just complied and waited for the courts or another election to “save” them.
3. Resistance and physical interposition – Some, of course, believe that the feds can never be stopped without a physical resistance. But this may not be required if enough states and localities take noncompliance seriously in #2 above. But, we also see the value in running the full spectrum of options from the simplest to the strongest in various parts of the country. In Washington State, the bill there is full non-compliance. Matt Shea and Jason Overstreet, the primary sponsors, feel they can get that moving forward, and hope to follow up with criminal penalties in a future bill. Then, potentially another to require arrest of fed agents for kidnapping could be considered. In Missouri, they’re tracking along the same lines.
In Tennessee, though, the bill being considered right now refers to indefinite detention as a “kidnapping” charge and requires the local sheriffs to stop them. (info here)

MORE STEPS IN VIRGINIA

HB1160 received a minor amendment in the Senate before passage and now goes back to the House for Concurrence. The bill previously passed the house by a vote of 96-4 so it’s expected that the amended version will sail through as well. The Amendment reads as follows:
§ 1. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of law, no agency or political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or employee of same acting in his official capacity, shall aid an agency of the United States in the unlawful detention of any United States citizen pursuant to 50 U.S.C. § 1541 as provided by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (P.L. 112-81, § 1021).
Delegate Marshall previously reported that Governor Bob McDonnell is opposing this legislation. And, even with such large veto-proof votes in both the House and Senate, Virginia residents are encouraged to take action today. Those living in Virginia are encouraged to contact their Senators with words of thanks for passing HB1160 (at this link) AND the Governor’s office (at this link) in support of this legislation now.

LEGISLATIVE TRACKING

CLICK HERE – to view 4 versions of the model bill, the Liberty Preservation Act, for introduction in your state, city, county or town
CLICK HERE – to track the status of the Liberty Preservation Act around the country.

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012...pos=0&at_tot=1



Liberty Preservation Act: Nullify “Indefinite Detention”



  • Liberty Preservation Act: Nullify “Indefinite Detention”






This legislative package is a state and local-level response to constitutional violations by the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (and other so-called federal “laws”) – primarily provisions that authorize indefinite detention. Activists, we encourage you to take action now. Work to get legislation passed in your city, town, county and state level today.
TRACK THE PROGRESS of the Liberty Preservation Act across the country here:
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/ndaa/
*******
STATE: Model legislation for introduction on a state-level to reject indefinite detention.
LOCAL: Model Ordinance for introduction on a local level – city, county, town. You should start with whatever local government you feel you can have the most effect, then move on to the next. i.e. Start with city, then move on to County. From there, you’ll want to reach out to people in neighboring communities to encourage the same.
*******
Liberty Preservation Act

The people of the State of (STATE) do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. THIS ACT SHALL BE KNOWN AS THE (STATE) LIBERTY PRESERVATION ACT.

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/legi...servation-act/




NDAA: Indefinite Detention






The federal government, under the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF), claims the power to arrest and detain people within the US and deny them access to courts, attorneys and more. In short, this is little more than government-sanctioned kidnapping. To learn more about the 2012 NDAA and indefinite detention, use the links in the sidebar of this page.
The Liberty Preservation Act – and local ordinance – bans participation with or assistance in any way with any federal act which purports to authorize the indefinite detention of a person within the United States. Passage of the Liberty Preservation Act in your state, county, city and town will create obstacles to implementation that will help thwart the unconstitutional indefinite detention efforts of the federal government. State laws and local ordinances and resolutions are all important pieces of the puzzle to resist and nullify NDAA “indefinite detention.” (model legislation here)
Click or Tap your state for updated information and action items
scroll down for additional bill information



















































+
−




LEGEND:
Blue – Introduced. Yellow – Passed one or more Houses. Green – Passed both Houses. Red – Law
MADISON’S BLUEPRINT

James Madison, known as the Father of the Constitution, gave us a blueprint for stopping federal overreach. In Federalist 46, heargued that a “refusal to comply with officers of the Union” along with other actions at the state and local level would create a situation where the federal government would have an almost impossible time enforcing their acts. When several states join together and do the same, Madison said it would “present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”
(You can read more about Madison’s blueprint HERE.)
In the Virginia Resolutions of 1798, Madison wrote that “in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise” of power by the federal government, states “have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil.” Thomas Jefferson, in the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, wrote that “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 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”
Indefinite Detention represents just the kind of dangerous, palpable evil Madison was talking about, and the assumptions of power that Jefferson was talking about.
Our model legislation is based on the principles and advice of James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. It’s not going to be easy, and there’s no guarantee of success. But, if we sit back and wait for the federal government to stop its own indefinite detention programs, we’ll wait forever.
So, as those founders advised, we’re taking action without the feds, and taking every step possible to create “obstructions,” and a “refusal to comply with officers of the Union,” as Madison advised. The goal is to get enough states and localities on board so that indefinite detention is rendered null and void, as Jefferson advised.
INDEFINITE DETENTION REPEALED?

While some believe that the 2013 NDAA eliminated indefinite detention, it did not. Dianne Feinstein introduced a very weak amendment to 2013 – and it failed anyway. 2012 indefinite detention provisions remain intact – and the Obama administration is aggressively defending them in court today.
Last year, Federal Judge Katherine Forrest struck down these indefinite detention powers as unconstitutional and issued a temporary court order blocking their use. That order was revoked by an appeals court and indefinite detention powers remain while the case is currently on appeal but not decided.
Additionally, when Judge Forrest asked Obama administration attorneys if the federal government was using indefinite detention in violation of her temporary order blocking it, they refused to confirm, leaving the door open for potential use of these powers in secret, even in outright defiance of an order from the federal courts.
All attempts to stop indefinite detention on a federal level – in courts and the congress – have so far failed. It remains the so-called “law of the land” and deserves to be nullified.
SUPREMACY CLAUSE

Some opponents of these efforts claim that the U.S. Constitution’s “supremacy clause” prevents your local community from taking action. But this is a complete misunderstanding, not only of the supremacy clause, but of the local legislation as well. There is absolutely ZERO serious dispute about the fact that the federal government cannot “commandeer” the states (or their political subdivisions, local governments) to carry out its laws. None. Even the Supreme Court has affirmed this multiple times.
In the 1842 case, Prigg v. Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court ruled that States couldn’t be required to help the feds carry out programs to capture and return runaway slaves.
In the 1992 case, New York v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress couldn’t require states to enact specified waste disposal regulations.
In the 1997 case, Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not command state law enforcement authorities to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers.
In the 2012 case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court ruled that a significant expansion of Medicaid was not a valid exercise of Congress’s spending power, as it would coerce states to either accept the expansion or risk losing existing Medicaid funding.
In each case, the Supreme Court made it quite clear that, in their opinion, the federal government cannot require the states to act, or even coerce them to act through a threat to cut funding. Their opinion is correct. If the feds pass a law, they can sure try to enforce it if they want. But the states, and your local communities, absolutely do not have to help them in any way.
MOVING FORWARD

While there is no silver bullet to stop Indefinite Detention, you have an option. Wait for the federal government to give up this power, or resist it in any way possible.
These steps are just the first step of what will likely be a multi-year campaign to resist, refuse to comply, and nullify the unconstitutional indefinite detention regime.
Once these first steps are moving forward in a number of states, the next – more aggressive – levels of resistance can take place successfully.
In the end, Rosa Parks already proved it. Saying “No!” can change the world.

http://tracking.tenthamendmentcenter.com/issues/ndaa/