Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

    Stephen Colbert Hit-piece On Nullification And State Sovereignty

    1.) Lincoln was not a founder of our nation and had no regard for the U.S. Constitution. Killing people and forcing your will upon them does not solve a debate on any topic.
    While he puts it bluntly I think there are nuances here. Lincoln had a regard for the Constitution but he misinterpreted it. He once said something to the effect that he needed to re-unite the country but his actions in doing so violated the Constitution. The Federal is not above the Constitution or the States.

    2.) Nullification does indeed work. Just ask the fourteen plus states that now have medical marijuana laws on the books and the two states that have legalized Marijuana outrightwith many more planning to do the same. Northern states used nullification to fight slavery by refusing to comply with the Fugitive Slave Act. States have also refused to implement the Read ID Act and the list of nullification successes goes on. Nullification works and is only picking up steam as the Federal government continues to violate the U.S. Constitution.
    Despite what the MSM may have you believe or the current Federal, there is a LONG history of the States telling the Federal to stick it.

    3.) Article Six (the supremacy clause) of the United States Constitution actually says:

    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.

    Our friend Cliff Sloan is lying through his teeth. He leaves out This Constitution, and the Laws made in Pursuance thereof; shall be the supreme Law of the Land when he quotes the constitution. Read correctly the meaning is clearly that only constitutional laws are the supreme law of the land, NOT that all laws made by the Federal Government are the supreme law of the land.
    A very clear statement and understanding of the wording. In this I feel very strongly his case is accurate. Yes Laws made by the Federal to execute the Constitutional mandates are legal and the law of the land. Those laws by the Federal that are outside Constitutional Mandate are not supreme over the States. The arguments come back to what is the Federal allowed to do. Which is the 18 enumerated mandates.

    4.) Thomas Jefferson, who actually made our system and actually knows how it works said, Where powers are assumed (by the Federal Government) which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy. Thomas Jefferson: Kentucky Resolutions, 1798.
    Jefferson = Nail on the Head here.

    5.) Article Three of the United States Constitution actually says:

    The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

    Notice the article says The Judicial power of the United States... What is the United States? It is the Federal Government. Remember that the constitution is a legal contract, agreed upon by the states, that formed the Federal Government. And so when the constitution (a document that created the Federal Government of the United States) speaks to the power of the United States, it is only speaking of the power of the Federal Government. In other words, article three only speaks to the Federal Government and its own Federal legal system. It does not speak to the relationship between the Federal Government and the individual states that created it.
    States Rights trump Federal. Secession is legal and should a State decide to leave the Union they are completely withing their Rights. The States created the Federal and are Supreme ultimately to the Federal.

  • #2
    Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

    The best presentation I ever read on the topic of Nullification and Secession was from the masterpiece of President Jefferson Davis, The Rise of the Confederate Government. I believe it was in his farewell address to the US Senate where he delivered his famous dictum of how nullification and secession are different.

    Nullification is when a subdivision of a body politic who has granted power to a larger affiliation has determined that larger affiliate has assumed powers not granted. That subdivision formerly re-establishes precisely what power it granted by nullifying or undoing whatever assumption of power was made within its territory. (NOTE: Davis makes the interesting point that a grant of power is different than a delegated power. An example is the chief executive of the States is called governor, a title not associated with developing foreign policy. The States were never delegated such authority by their State Constitutions. The States, therefore, explicitly granted power rather than delegated certain powers they implicitly had to the super-State confederation).

    Secession is when a body politic withdraws or rescinds all granted and delegated powers and once again assumes its sovereign status as an independent State. It is important to note that when the former colonies of England won their independence from the Crown in the Treaty of Paris, they were not recognized collectively. The former colonies were individually recognized as separate and independent sovereign States. And according to the US Constitution all States subsequently added to the Union were equal to the original. Equal in what way? Equal in the inherent and inalienable sovereignty.

    To summarize: Nullification is an act within a larger body politic. Secession is the act of a sovereign.

    The enemies of freedom leading up to the War of Northern Aggression pretended the ratification of the US Constitution established the principle of so-called "popular sovereignty," meaning the States gave up their sovereignty. Not only was this never an explicit forfeit, many of the States ratification documents explicitly retained their sovereignty in ratifying the US Constitution AND had words very similar to what became the 10th Amendment. In addition, the principle of so-called "popular sovereignty," denies the founding principle of the Declaration of Independence that the people have the right to alter of abolish their government by saying the people of NYC can trump the will of the people of Charleston. To suppose this to be true is to suppose the Founding Fathers fought and won a war of independence with the super-power of the day only to give up their hard fought and dearly paid for Liberty to be enslaved by numbers when all the evidence points to the exact opposite conclusion; that the United States is not a homogenous entity but a heterogeneous collection of sovereign States and Founding Father's wrote so eloquently in the Federalist Papers against the dangers of numbers and democracy in favor of the republic, which is not central or national in character but federal in nature.

    ?


    • #3
      Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

      Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
      Lincoln had a regard for the Constitution
      I reject such claims out of hand. Lincoln is the anti-Jefferson. His actions deny the principles of the Declaration of Independence, to say the least. On what principle can the States secede from England but not secede from the USA? On what principle can Texas secede from Mexico but not from the USA? On what principle can West Virginia secede from Virginia but Virginia not secede from the USA? Not the principals of morals but the ambitions a ruthless dictator!

      Lincoln's entire object in object in prosecuting the War of Northern Aggression was to transform the union of voluntary consent to a union at gunpoint, from a union of equals to a union of slave and master. He had no Constitutional authority to use force against the States, deny the divorce or the right of the divorce. Lincoln was single-handedly responsible for the death of millions of Americans; his despotism far worse than King George. Northern Apologists engage in his propaganda to this day. Lincoln is a tyrant of the 1st order.

      ?


      • #4
        Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

        Originally posted by JohnLocke View Post
        I reject such claims out of hand. Lincoln is the anti-Jefferson. His actions deny the principles of the Declaration of Independence, to say the least. On what principle can the States secede from England but not secede from the USA? On what principle can Texas secede from Mexico but not from the USA? On what principle can West Virginia secede from Virginia but Virginia not secede from the USA? Not the principals of morals but the ambitions a ruthless dictator!

        Lincoln's entire object in object in prosecuting the War of Northern Aggression was to transform the union of voluntary consent to a union at gunpoint, from a union of equals to a union of slave and master. He had no Constitutional authority to use force against the States, deny the divorce or the right of the divorce. Lincoln was single-handedly responsible for the death of millions of Americans; his despotism far worse than King George. Northern Apologists engage in his propaganda to this day. Lincoln is a tyrant of the 1st order.
        It isn't that I don't agree with you John, but you pulled 1/2 a sentence and made a comment. I think you have been debating with the Liberals here a bit too long.

        ?


        • #5
          Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

          Missouri has several bills proposed in the legislature right now concerning nullification. I believe that many states are about to exert their independence from the oppression in Washington. If that doesn't work, I see states working towards a Constitutional Convention to take their power back.

          http://www.libertyclassroom.com/nullification/

          Legislators in Missouri, Kansas and elsewhere look to nullify federal laws

          Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/01/20...#storylink=cpy

          ?


          • #6
            Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

            Currently there are 14 States that have Bills that have passed or are working through their legislatures stating that any Gun Control laws coming out of the Federal will not be enforced, including Texas where they will lock up Federal Officials who try and enforce them.

            ?


            • #7
              Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

              Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
              While he puts it bluntly I think there are nuances here. Lincoln had a regard for the Constitution but he misinterpreted it. He once said something to the effect that he needed to re-unite the country but his actions in doing so violated the Constitution. The Federal is not above the Constitution or the States.
              I think most people who are familiar with the Civil War would agree that Lincoln assumed extra-Constitutional authority in the face of national dissolution. How we view him depends on whether we believe that to be the sole, or supreme, metric by which presidents should be judged.

              Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
              Despite what the MSM may have you believe or the current Federal, there is a LONG history of the States telling the Federal to stick it.
              Very true. Though the significance of that fact alone is a little ambiguous. E.G. The fact that many people get away with speeding doesn't tell us whether the state has the right to impose speed limits.

              I'd be more interested to hear if the SCOTUS ever upheld a state's authority to reject federal law. That would establish a much stronger precedent than the fact that various states have, at times, done so.

              Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
              A very clear statement and understanding of the wording. In this I feel very strongly his case is accurate. Yes Laws made by the Federal to execute the Constitutional mandates are legal and the law of the land. Those laws by the Federal that are outside Constitutional Mandate are not supreme over the States. The arguments come back to what is the Federal allowed to do. Which is the 18 enumerated mandates.
              That's all well and good, but it just boils down to the question of who, when there is a disagreement, has the authority to decide which laws are constitutional and which are now. By long established precedent, that authority rests with the SCOTUS. If it rested with the state legislatures individually, then we would have no reliable method for creating national laws and the supremacy clause would be meaningless, since every state would always claim that any laws conflicting with its own were unconstitutional.

              Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
              Jefferson = Nail on the Head here.
              If "our system" means the Constitution (and it seems to everywhere else in this piece) then Jefferson is a terrible authority to quote, since he wasn't part of the body that created that document and, IIRC, wasn't terribly supportive of it at the time.

              Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
              States Rights trump Federal. Secession is legal and should a State decide to leave the Union they are completely withing their Rights. The States created the Federal and are Supreme ultimately to the Federal.
              That view simply isn't supported by the text of the Constitution. Both the Supremacy Clause and the 10th Amendment make it clear that, within certain limits, the Federal government trumps the individual states (though visa-versa outside those limits). That's the meaning of Federalism: each is sovereign within its own sphere. We can debate the proper limits of those spheres, but for the practical purposes of creating and enforcing law, there most be some single body that determines them. Both practicality and long-standing precedent make the SCOTUS that final, determinate body.

              ?


              • #8
                Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
                Currently there are 14 States that have Bills that have passed or are working through their legislatures stating that any Gun Control laws coming out of the Federal will not be enforced, including Texas where they will lock up Federal Officials who try and enforce them.
                Hah! Texas is gonna lock up the Feds. I can't wait to see how that works out for Kim Jong Perry.

                ?


                • #9
                  Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                  It's hard to take state secession from the union serious, especially when every state has its hand out for federal programs in their state. I think the arrogance and state of our federal government is below a piss poor rating to say the least, but secession won't solve anything. People are entirely to dependent on the federal government, including the state governments, and any serious consideration of secession would make things very chaotic

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                    If a state did secede from the US would they be allowed to rejoin easily or would they face an uphill struggle for walking away in the first place?

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                      If secession is not legal or Constitutional can someone explain West Virginia?

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                        Originally posted by buck84 View Post
                        ... any serious consideration of secession would make things very chaotic
                        That is freedom for you.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                          Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
                          If secession is not legal or Constitutional can someone explain West Virginia?
                          Sure. Lincolns only Constitutional authority to sent troops into States was to enforce federal law. Therefore, everyone was deputized in theory. Another bit of sophistry regarding the Southern State governments was that Lincoln supposed they were ALL under coercion of dark forces; meaning not acting on their Free Will. So, he "recognized" various alternative legislative bodies as the legitimate representatives of the people of those States, who happened to adamantly want to stay in the Union.

                          The US Constitution allows a State to allow another State to be formed within its boundaries WITH the consent of that States legislature. West Virginia got that "consent" from the legislatures Lincoln "recognized." Sophistry all the way around but that is how it went down.

                          (̅_̅_̅(̅(̅_̅_̅_̅_̅_̅̅()ڪ

                          Originally posted by Dilettante View Post
                          Lincoln assumed extra-Constitutional authority
                          This is what lead to secession in the 1st place.

                          ?


                          • #14
                            Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                            Originally posted by JohnLocke View Post

                            This is what lead to secession in the 1st place.
                            The first seven states seceded before Lincoln was even inaugurated.

                            ?


                            • #15
                              Re: Let's discuss Nullification and Secession again. They are related.

                              Originally posted by Dilettante View Post
                              The first seven states seceded before Lincoln was even inaugurated.
                              Yup. They seceded b/c the previous administration acted extra-Constitutional and Lincoln promised to do so even more. See The American System. See The Real Lincoln. See the Declarations of Secession.

                              There are two points here. Why the South seceded and do the people of each State have the right to alter or abolish their government - regardless of you agreeing with their reason (see USSR-Georgia-Chechnya.)

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X