Towards the disintegration of the union
Proposed Amendment Would Enable States to Repeal Federal Law
By KATE ZERNIKE
The same people driving the lawsuits that seek to dismantle the Obama administration’s health care overhaul have set their sights on an even bigger target: a constitutional amendment that would allow a vote of the states to overturn any act of Congress.
Under the proposed “repeal amendment,” any federal law or regulation could be repealed if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states voted to do so.
The idea has been propelled by the wave of Republican victories in the midterm elections. First promoted by Virginia lawmakers and Tea Party groups, it has the support of legislative leaders in 12 states. It also won the backing of the incoming House majority leader, Representative Eric Cantor, when it was introduced this month in Congress.
Like any constitutional amendment, it faces enormous hurdles: it must be approved by both chambers of Congress — requiring them to agree, in this case, to check their own power — and then by three-quarters of, or 38, state legislatures.
(More here.)
By KATE ZERNIKE
The same people driving the lawsuits that seek to dismantle the Obama administration’s health care overhaul have set their sights on an even bigger target: a constitutional amendment that would allow a vote of the states to overturn any act of Congress.
Under the proposed “repeal amendment,” any federal law or regulation could be repealed if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states voted to do so.
The idea has been propelled by the wave of Republican victories in the midterm elections. First promoted by Virginia lawmakers and Tea Party groups, it has the support of legislative leaders in 12 states. It also won the backing of the incoming House majority leader, Representative Eric Cantor, when it was introduced this month in Congress.
Like any constitutional amendment, it faces enormous hurdles: it must be approved by both chambers of Congress — requiring them to agree, in this case, to check their own power — and then by three-quarters of, or 38, state legislatures.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
The article states that Minnesota has a supporter in the legislature ... not sure how many, but Steve Drazkowski, member, Minnesota House of Representatives "The federal government continues to squash the sovereignty rights of the states as guaranteed by the 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution unrelentingly and at an accelerating pace. From countless unaffordable federal mandates imposed upon Minnesota's healthcare system, education programs, and even families, the overreach of Congress has gone unchecked. It's time for the states to restore their Constitutionally-protected autonomy, and that's why I am going to sponsor the Article V application for the Repeal Amendment.
And it is not just healthcare that is the target ... but also, there is DADT and Virginia Delegate Robert G. Marshall who said the Constitution reserves states with the authority to do so and that he’ll introduce a bill in the state General Assembly next year that ensures the “the effect of the 1994 federal law banning active homosexuals from America’s military forces will apply to the Virginia National Guard.”
“With the repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ President Obama seeks to pay back his homosexual political supporters,” the Prince William County Republican said, echoing a sentiment shared by many of the repeal’s most ardent opponents. “This policy will weaken military recruitment and retention, and will increase pressure for a military draft.”
“The Constitution never would have been ratified if states were not [guaranteed] unqualified control of the militia, now called the National Guard,”
he said.
But that argument may rejected based on the Fourteenth Amendment : All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Post a Comment
<< Home