Constitutionally Recognized States’ Rights Being Pushed as Unconstitutional

The Common Constitutionalist 7 hours ago

For years, we constitutional conservatives have been railing against federal encroachment on States' Rights. And for that, we've been called every name in the book.

There are 10th Amendment groups all over the country. They are derided by the both the left and right as being out of touch, unrealistic, and just plain backwards. Most think these groups are simply comprised of gun-toting, hard right hicks who just hate the thought of a federal government or societal progress.

The assemblage of reasonable folks at ThinkProgress calls them Tenthers. I'm sure it is a term of endearment.

These Tenthers have gotten a bad rap from pretty much everyone as being completely anti-federal government, though they are not. They, like the rest of us constitutional conservatives, only wish to live and be governed by the real rule of law – the Constitution of the United States.

Unfortunately, we are living in a post-constitutional nation, ruled only by federal laws, most of which are unconstitutional.

In 2009, Sam Rohrer, a Pennsylvania republican who ran unsuccessfully to unseat Senator Bob Casey in 2012, said: "Over time, over the last many generations, the federal government — seeking to grow, as most governments tend to grow — have become increasingly involved in activities that have been reserved to the states, being involved in such things as education, or health care, or, for that matter, even highways and roads. A great many things the federal government has increasingly passed laws, appropriated tax dollars which are yours and mine, and attempted to force the states to implement laws for which then the federal government essentially has control…"

For his stance on upholding constitutionally mandated States' Rights, he was ridiculed.

ThinkProgress: "Under Rohrer's interpretation of the constitution, the federal government may not operate Medicare or Medicaid, provide any safety net for poor families with depended children, enact any national educational standards…"

Of course, he is absolutely correct. But the left and the establishment wing of the Republican Party would have us believe Rohrer is dead wrong.
All on the left and some on the right have been okay with this federal usurpation for many decades. State laws and even amendments to State Constitutions regarding abortion, homosexual marriage, and religious freedom have been hijacked by the feds, much to the delight of the left.

Yet, now the feds have set their sights on a lefty sacred cow – Marijuana.

Several states have passed laws legalizing pot for both medical and recreational use, yet the drug is still outlawed by the feds.
A family in Washington State was recently raided by federal agents for growing their own medical marijuana on their own property. The family is now facing federal prosecution on drug charges. Medical marijuana is legal in Washington State. They have abided by the state law, but the feds claim jurisdiction due to what is quaintly referred to as the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution.

That sounds rather ominous, which is antithetical to the U.S. Constitution.

The geniuses at the Huffington Post describe the second clause of Article VI as such: "The supremacy clause contains what's known as the doctrine of pre-emption, which says that the federal government wins in the case of conflicting legislation. Basically, if a federal and state law contradict, then when you're in the state you can follow the state law, but the feds can decide to stop you." And it's not just them. Many, if not most on the left and right agree with that statement.

Article VI, section 2: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Most like to concentrate only on "Laws of the United States," "shall be the supreme Law of the Land," and "Judges in every State shall be bound thereby.'
Yet, one only need to read the first sentence (preceding the semi-colon) to understand fully that any federal statute that represents itself as a law, but is not made in conformance with the U.S. Constitution, is, in fact, not a law at all—it is null and void.

As federal crack-downs on pot growers increase, might some on the left begin to see that States' Rights is not just some right wing abstract?

Could it be that the pot-smoking left may find some common ground, a kinship with the Tenthers?

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.


Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/11/co...PqCXX14C6Qh.99