State Sovereignty Movement Gaining Steam

“As more governors declare their opposition to the Stimulus Bill — which is now estimated to include more than $1 trillion in unfunded mandates for the states above and beyond the initial $800 billion cost — more and more state legislators across the nation have been introducing bills to assert state sovereignty under the 10th Amendment in an effort to assert the rights of their citizens and the authority of state governments against unwarranted interference by the federal government….”

Dave Nalle, Republican Liberty Caucus, February 20, 2009

5 thoughts on “State Sovereignty Movement Gaining Steam

  1. I have been following this with interest, it is one of the more positive things going on right now. Time will tell whether the movement really has teeth.

  2. This is all well and good, expect that this state sovereignty is unnecessary, and another one of those “shut up” moves by the state legislatures rather than doing what they need to do in order to curtail the federal government and act as “representatives” of the people rather than “agents” of the feds. In Article IV, Section 4 it already asserts the “sovereignty” of the states by “guaranteeing to each state a Republican form of government,” and the Tenth Amendment already reinforces that any and all powers not given to the federal government rest with the states and the people.

    This is redundancy, and will serve no purpose unless and until the states actually start suing the federal government for “lack of performance” when they don’t provide the revenue or resources for the enumerated powers, or start filing “injunctions” when they overstep their powers and start forcing the state’s and people to cowtow to their unconstitutional edicts.

    This is nothing more than a move in “word” that will not be enforced by “deed,” unless more energy is put into confronting the state legislators also on the “negligence” in doing their proscribed functions when the feds are either out of line, or themselves negligent in their duties.

    Nothing more than more bureaucracy and looking like they are doing something, when actually doing nothing at all.

  3. Yes…I wonder about that. I wonder why everyone is focusing on “movements” and “conventions” to change laws (all good of course, but secondary)
    Why is no one focusing on enforcing the civil/criminal laws on the books -
    through litigation, police, whatever it takes.

    Where is the direct pressure on the FBI in the Madoff case, for example?

  4. Agreed that it is “unnecessary”, as it is covered by the US Constitution, but there is value in giving it a “State” perspective as well.

    I also agree that if it is not put into practice it will prove useless.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>