Numerous states are involved in a general plan to stop President Obama and the federal government from further encroachment on the rights of the states and individuals, based on the Tenth Amendment and Article V of the Constitution. Their plan goes around Congress and the government, using nullification to do away with unconstitutional laws and a Convention of the States to Constitutionally check the power of the federal government, something that more and more people are supporting. Of course, the mainstream media is virtually ignoring the nullification and Convention of States movement, as they more or less support the expansion and overreach of the federal government. It has fallen to sites like this one, and many others in the alternative media, to share the news about nullification and the Convention with you. Many people have criticized the efforts by some states to nullify federal laws within their borders, claiming that states don’t have that power. But in reality, states do indeed have the Constitutional right to nullify federal laws like Obamacare or gun control.
Nullification begins with a decision made in your state legislature to resist a federal law deemed to be unconstitutional. It usually involves a bill, passed by both houses and signed by your governor. In some cases, it might be approved by the voters of your state directly, in a referendum. It may change your state’s statutory law or it might even amend your state constitution. It is a refusal on the part of your state government to cooperate with, or enforce any federal law it deems to be unconstitutional.
Critics will often point to the “supremacy clause” of the Constitution as rendering state nullification illegal, but the Tenth Amendment Center argues otherwise.
The major argument used by those that oppose Nullification is the Constitution’s supremacy clause. But in fact, the arguments for the supremacy clause ARE the arguments for nullification. The major architects of the Constitution, and those that led the fight for its adoption, laid down what the supremacy clause meant during the ratifying conventions. By doing so, they defended state sovereignty, and set the stage for the negation of unconstitutional actions. [The Founders] established the means for the states to defend themselves and their citizens from a general government that exceeding its authority and that power is NULLIFICATION.
Then there is Article V of the Constitution, which spells out two methods for amending the document. The first method, and the only one used thus far, is through Congress. The second, and untried method, bypasses Congress and falls to the states, allowing them to call a Convention of the States, if two-thirds of the states agree and apply, for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution. Any proposed amendments would need three-fourths of the states to agree on the amendment and then ratify it through their state legislators. Once that occurs, the amendment would be added to the Constitution and have the same power and authority as any other part of the document. Last year, around 100 lawmakers from several different states held a meeting at Mt. Vernon to discuss an Article V Convention, and get the process started. Since that time, a number of states have proposed or passed resolutions, or at least shown interest in a convention, but only a couple of states have actually officially applied for a convention. If the requisite number of states eventually apply for a convention, such a convention would likely be limited to considering only a handful of possible amendments. Those would likely include such things as a balanced budget, mandatory caps on spending or taxes, Congressional term limits, and increased oversight on federal agencies and courts, among other things. These are the two main methods for states to legally stop Obama and the ever-growing federal government, and reclaim their sovereignty and authority within their borders. The nullification route is fairly straightforward, and requires only the will of the state legislature and the people to stand up and resist the federal government. The Convention of the States is a far more involved and in-depth method, requiring cooperation from an overwhelming majority of states and the people, but the results would be more far-reaching and lasting than individual state nullification efforts.