Nullification and Interposition – 2018

Hits: 0

  LS

 "Like many California cities, Oakland has declared itself a sanctuary for those here illegally, and officials there have vowed to fight President Trump's promised immigration crackdown. Tensions have heightened in recent weeks as administration officials have talked about targeting California for increased immigration enforcement. Trump last week also said he was thinking of withdrawing Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from the state, predicting it could cause a wave of crime.

While Schaaf said she was trying to help those who might be arrested, some advocates said it had a different impact.

"The main reaction that people have had has been fear, unfortunately," said Eleni Wolfe, immigration program director at Centro Legal de la Raza, an Oakland-based advocacy group. "It's terrifying to hear about the potential of increased enforcement action, and unfortunately that's the main message that they heard."

Across California, leaders said they find themselves in a difficult position as they fight federal law enforcement actions. Typically, they said, local and federal officials work in concert. But on immigration, they are at odds."  LA Times

***********

 "Nullification, in United States constitutional history, is a legal theory that a state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional. The theory of nullification has never been legally upheld by federal courts."  wiki

***********

 "Interposition is a claimed right of a U.S. state to oppose actions of the federal government that the state deems unconstitutional. Under the theory of interposition, a state assumes the right to "interpose" itself between the federal government and the people of the state by taking action to prevent the federal government from enforcing laws that the state considers unconstitutional. In Cooper v. Aaron, 35potential rebels in California are walking a fine line ad8 U.S. 1 (1958), the Supreme Court of the United States rejected interposition explicitly. The Supreme Court and the lower federal courts have consistently held that the power to declare federal laws unconstitutional lies with the federal judiciary, not with the states. The courts have held that interposition is not a valid constitutional doctrine when invoked to block enforcement of federal law."  wiki

———–

 The leftist politicians who run California are playing with fire.  The US is not Canada where N&I or outright secession would probably be met with hand-wringing and not much else.  We fought our biggest and most destructive war over these issues and they were largely settled by force majeur.   The potential rebels in the Golden State are betting on their ability to frustrate enforcement of federal immigration law by avoiding direct statements of defiance or orders to local government to physically resist arrests and deportation.

IMO this game can only be played so long as the federal government allows it.  If that forbearance ends then they could easily be declared to be guilty of criminal acts.  pl

 http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ice-raids-oakland-20180226-story.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullification_(U.S._Constitution)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interposition

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libby_Schaaf

This entry was posted in government. Bookmark the permalink.

86 Responses to Nullification and Interposition – 2018

  1. Tyler says:

    (((Libby Schaaf))), every time.

  2. Pacifca Advocate says:

    >>>IMO this game can only be played so long as the federal government allows it. If that forbearance ends then they could easily be declared to be guilty of criminal acts. pl
    It seems to me that there are a lot of people–Americans, who are fed up with being marginalized and arbitrarily imprisoned in their own home country–who are out, living on the streets, and who are prepared to fight this “war” (I’m presuming you mean in a military sense–no?) that you imply, here.
    I’m asking you, sincerely, Col: first, do you think there is an alternative to this particular civil war–which, please correct me if i’m wrong–you are suggesting is likely to occur?
    Secondly: do you know people, currently in power, who really do want to fight this particular war?

  3. Oilman2 says:

    Trumps EO regarding human trafficking expressly declared a state of national emergency.
    How does this factor in to curbing sanctuary and non-enforcement?

  4. Covergirl says:

    Nice hypothesis. As an Oakland resident, I say F*ck the Feds. This country was not built on xenophobic genocide…oh wait, yes it was,,
    Amendment 10: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
    Ofc, the Supreme Court has devolved from an independent branch of a moderately well conceived government into something very difficult to understand. It increasingly weighs in favor of adjudications which run counter to much scholarship, and certainly abrogates much of the intent of the Constitution.
    Though California may well get smacked down by the Feds, there are a great many solid, rational arguments that lead to the conclusion the Fed oversteps, and thus acts illegally. Precious little anyone can do about such abuses though. Voting sure as hell doesn’t work and to take arms against a sea of troubles is just daft.

  5. JohnsonR says:

    Forbearance for now possibly being motivated by “give them enough rope”……

  6. Jeannie Catherine says:

    “…this game can only be played so long as the federal government allows it. If that forbearance ends, then they could easily be declared to be guilty of criminal acts.” pl
    Let us pray!!
    A 4th generation northern Californian (and a 5th generation legal immigrant), I have lived in the same home in Berkeley CA for the past 35 years. I am _afraid_ to fly the American flag from the holder installed on my front porch almost 100 years ago. Afraid to fly the American flag? …because that would identify me as (a) a patriot, (b) opposing the hard-lefts’ insane political tactics, and (c) invite a rock through my picture window.
    God bless this site! I find refuge and courage here.
    Jeannie Catherine

  7. TV says:

    Whenever I’ve visited California, or dealt with Californians in other places, it’s always felt like dealing with children.
    There’s like a missing maturity gene there.
    They’re forever apologizing for screwing up.

  8. turcopolier says:

    PA and james
    It seems that you missed the whole story of the US Civil War. It is obvious that no state can secede. An attempt to do so would be met with whatever force was necessary. pl

  9. Jubal says:

    “It is obvious that no state can secede. An attempt to do so would be met with whatever force was necessary.”
    What is obvious is that no war crime, no crime against humanity, no lie will be allowed to prevent Yankees from completing the current task given to them by their Zionist overlords.
    When the time comes that it is in the interest of these overlords to have the US torn asunder, it will be. It is no different than Yugoslavia, birthed in Versailles but ripped apart in Nato’s eastern Europe power grab.

  10. I dismiss all his “California secession” stuff as utter nonsense. It ain’t gonna happen.
    As for the “sanctuary state” stuff, California has managed to get marijuana for medical purposes developed, so perhaps the state has enough tax clout that it can hold off some degree of Federal enforcement for a while.
    But I don’t see it being able to do so indefinitely. If the Feds want to crack down on immigration in California, they’ll do it.
    However, with, what, seven million illegals in the US, throwing them back over the border just isn’t going to be a long-term solution. What needs to happen is somehow Mexico needs to be changed from a narco-state to something more compatible with its population’s real needs.
    I don’t care how many “walls” you build, people who see a better future in the US than they have in Mexico are going to get in. And so will the drugs and the crime.
    Beyond those statements I couldn’t care less about the whole issue since it’s just another example of how a country this size is basically ungovernable.

  11. AEL says:

    Canada *did* put down a couple of rebellions with force out west a while back. And, of course, there was the The Republic of Manitoba

  12. A.Pols says:

    There is a possible scenario for secession, but a lot of pieces would have to fall into place. Hypothetically, if a sufficient number of states became restive, and a push for a constitutional convention arose, those states could in theory vote to dissolve the union, go their separate ways and even form new nations. But a whole lot of antecedent conditions would have to be met, chief among them being collapse of finance and loss of Dollar dominance. That could vitiate the power of the central govt. to the point where the cost benefit balance would tip against remaining united.
    But that’s not happening tomorrow.
    “Sanctuary Cities” are somewhat of a fiction created by virtue signalling local governments. As such they are certainly free to withhold active collaboration with federal law and policy, but should they choose the path of active interference their govt. officials could end up in Federal Court on obstruction charges. Personally I think it might not be such a bad idea for the the feds to target sanctuary cities for enhanced enforcement.

  13. Jose says:

    California secession = Making America Great Again!!!
    If they refuse to obey laws or election outcomes, why should they be considered Americans?

  14. Seamus Padraig says:

    John Calhoun lives!

  15. turcopolier says:

    AEL
    Louis Riel et all? Sure but it is no longer the same country. the US has in contrast gotten even meaner since CW1. pl

  16. SmoothieX12 says:

    it seems like the people of the west coast have more in common..
    Depends. Plus damn Californians were moving North for two decades now screwing real estate prices and local politics non-stop. As I stated once–the ideal solution would be to “cut out” the coast from SF-through LA into whatever the hell those freaks there want it to be–a multicultural cloaca and be done with them. This “plan” allows to preserve San-Diego as a naval base and Mt. Shasta’s magnificent oecumene. Just fence the damn freak-show in that cursed locality. Run the freaking national border south of Redding and along Sierra-Nevada slightly to the north of San-Diego, with all infrastructure which comes with borders–sensors, fences, patrols and clear cut and well advertised ROE of intruders. Culturally and politically that part of California is a cancer which continues to metastasize.

  17. Eric Newhill says:

    Feinstein has been declared too moderate to be in the running by Californians. The streets of the major cities are filled with homeless and their feces. La Raza and the Mexican Mafia have infiltrated the seats of local government. The state is perpetually facing natural disasters and fiscal collapse. There must be some law(s) could be interpreted to allow the feds to move in and take over.
    If CA goes, the other bastions of leftist goofballs, Oregon and Washington state, will go with it. Obviously that can’t – and won’t – be allowed.
    Declare Gov Brown et al traitors who collude with Mexico and other countries (e.g. global warming initiatives) against the interests of the country, invade, imprison and restore order?

  18. SmoothieX12 says:

    but should they choose the path of active interference their govt. officials could end up in Federal Court on obstruction charges. Personally I think it might not be such a bad idea for the the feds to target sanctuary cities for enhanced enforcement.
    Ideally–yes. The problem, however, is not just judicial, it is cultural and ideological (with ethnic and racial factors following)–they continue to reproduce generation after generation of people who are not identifying with America in a larger sense. It is a wholesale rejection out of hand of ANY American idea, not just the bad ones, which, of course, there is aplenty around. They disagree in principle. That was known in Marxism as irreconcilable contradictions. In general, those people have no conception of nation.

  19. Fred says:

    Covergirl,
    Those darn Buffalo Soldiers and Indian Scouts were a tough lot when it came to “pacifying” those opposed to settling the West. The settlers in those wagon trains were not quite like the bunch who now show up at an airconditioned international airport and are met by their choice of volunteers and employees of hundreds of refugee resettlement groups and are promptly provided, free of duty, charge obligation or fee: preferencial placement for housing, education, jobs, business set-assides, and lets not forget outright grants of money. To which their progeny are entitled for generations to come due to the legacy guilt of every other American.
    “Voting sure as hell doesn’t work….” It seems to have worked for Libby Schaff and it’s not even gender biased – it worked for a man! Donald J. Trump.

  20. Peter VE says:

    Colonel, The Constitution can be amended to allow secession. Of course, there are usually hotheads like General Beauregard who want to cut the Gordian knot, rather than negotiate. The likelihood that Congress or a Constitutional Convention will approve an amendment, which will then be ratified, is pretty close to zero, but it is possible.

  21. turcopolier says:

    Peter VE
    Yes, and it is more possible that I will live to see SST 100 years old than that there will be either a constitutional convention or an amendment allowing secession. You don’t think I know these things are POSSIBLE? I despair. pl

  22. turcopolier says:

    fred
    “Buffalo Soldiers? Those four regiments were a small part of the Indian wars army. pl

  23. California, the self-labeled “State of Resistance,” passed and signed into law the California Values Act (SB 54) that effectively codified California as a sanctuary state. Actually, it doesn’t impede ICE operations. It lays out a long list of illegal aliens guilty of criminal behavior who state LE can work with ICE to deport. Fresno currently has over 200 such illegal aliens in custody awaiting ICE pickup. ICE is neglecting these requests and is instead planning on a statewide workplace sweep to apprehend some 1,500 illegal aliens. Many in the state see this as a federal effort to cripple the state economy in order to break the “State of Resistance.” I think it’s a lot closer to CW2 than many people think, but it will be our version of a “hybrid war” rather than a shooting war.
    Other areas of resistance which the federal government want to break include California’s environmental laws and marijuana legalization. California is moving to erase thousands of marijuana convictions. On the economic front, Brown has been negotiating trade deals with Xi of China in science, innovation and green development. On the legal front, several state AGs are pursuing investigating and prosecution of various corporate wrongdoers like Equifax which the US AG has dropped investigation and prosecution.

  24. SmoothieX12 says:

    i have no idea how true that might be..
    Hollywood and most (not all) of its loaded propaganda masquerading as an art of movies? Just a thought.

  25. AK says:

    James,
    My god, what myopia! Your comment is microcosmic of the Left’s habit of being its own worst enemy in its absolute refusal to deal with reality.
    Obviously, you’re not from around any of the places of which you write. Having lived the past five years in Los Angeles and having recently relocated to a college town in the Willamette Valley (career move for the wife), you might think I’d be susceptible to the same myopia. However, I travel a lot, and more importantly, I talk to and pay attention to people wherever I go, and I can assert with absolute certainty that the citizens of these states are not homogeneous in their political and cultural views. Least of all in California. I suggest you do as I’ve done and take a long (very long) road trip through the backwater byways and dusty state routes that criss-cross these places. If you can overcome your cognitive dissonance in the experience, you will learn a great deal. Have you never heard of the 51st State of Jefferson? It’s a real and enduring aspiration among the citizens of the border counties in northern California and southern Oregon. I can assure you, these people are serious.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_(proposed_Pacific_state)
    http://soj51.org/
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/02/us/california-far-north-identity-conservative.html
    The point is this: The large population centers notwithstanding, there are very significant contingents of conservative, USA-loving folk out here who have no intention of entrusting their futures or their safety to the Champagne Socialist elites on the coasts and in the cities. They hold no cultural or political affinity for their self-anointed “betters”. In fact, “seething antipathy” is the most accurate phrase to describe their sentiment.
    You’re Canadian, so I’ll give a pass on your ignorance of these features of the American West. Still, the fact that this “West Coast” secessionist clap-trap is still being bandied about out here gives me hope that the Left is careening towards the cliff of irrelevance faster than I could have imagined. Reality will mug their lot once again, as it always has and always will. As for whether California (a state once again drowning in debt where the public services are by and large abysmal, despite boasting the nation’s highest sales and income tax rates) would be better off on its own, it’s such an asinine suggestion as to not warrant my addressing it.

  26. turcopolier says:

    james
    You are amazing. You don’t know any history? Do you know any Canadian history? Do you not agree with Santayana? Have you ever heard of Vimy Ridge or 3rd Ypres? My uncle John, an American kid in the Canadian and later British armies fought in all those places. pl

  27. jdledell says:

    I’m curious about the group’s reaction if the shoe were on the other foot. it seems inevitable that sometime in the future we will have a Democratic Congress and President. If such a future administration passed some environmental laws, for example, that met heavy resistence in Red States would people here be advocating a heavy Federal hand to put down such resistence? Or is the issue a partisen political issue – ie if I disagree with what the state is doing lets have the Feds put down the resistence and lets keep the Fed out if I agree with what the state is doing?

  28. turcopolier says:

    jdledell
    In our last experience of Democratic Left rule under Obama the technique for subjugation of the states to utopian vision was the imposition of “consent decrees” by Obama/Holder on the basis of overwhelming lawyer manpower and threat of bankruptcy in court. this occurred even in places in which investigation had not indicated criminal conduct. None of the affected states attempted nullification of federal law in response. pl

  29. AK says:

    TV,
    “They’re forever apologizing for screwing up.” I’d have to respectfully disagree on this one, at least insofar as it refers to the coastal, city folk. They are indeed like children in the sense that they typically display a severely stunted or undeveloped capacity for self-reflection and responsibility. On balance, I’m happy I left. I miss the weather and the scenery. The “culture”? Not so much…

  30. jpb says:

    The Federal Government gave up on charging marijuana offenses, except the most egregious, in many states in the last fifteen years because of jury nullification. The Federal Government simply can’t get a conviction on a marijuana charge in many states. The intransigence and incompetence of Federal Marijuana Laws is the camel’s nose in the increase movement to federalism in the USA. The Federal Government started it and the boomer generation won that long unjust civil war on the marijuana battle field.
    If we are wise, we will allow and encourage more federalism in the USA. It is the statesman’s answer to keeping the USA a nation with increasingly polarized and diverse groups in our population. The white population of CA is now below 40%, with most of them left coast culturally and politically. I used to have more concern about the Mexican population of CA, but over my lifetime I observe them assimilating as Americans. They came here to be Americans and only a few loud mouth activists talk about La Raza. The Mexicans are a conservative family oriented group, although more big government than conservative whites. On the bright side, Maxine Waters may lose her Congressional seat to one of the hard working Mexican immigrants.
    There is a good article in the Claremont Review of Books called “The Cold Civil War” by Angelo M. Codevilla which addresses the issue of federalism as wise solution to the forces of diversity in the USA, short of a hot Civil War.
    https://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-cold-civil-war/

  31. AK says:

    SmoothieX12,
    “…multicultural cloaca…”
    A finer turn of phrase I haven’t come across in a great long while. Bravo.

  32. Fred says:

    TTG,
    Deporting 1,500 illegal aliens will cripple the California economy? You can’t be serous. I’m sure California has more than 1,500 unemployed American citizens who would like full time jobs.
    By “hybrid war” you mean the left will double down on DACA and immigration in general, including H1B visas? How will that work for the Eric Garner, Freddie Grey and Travon Martins of America? Does the left really think they need to compete with even more immigrants?

  33. VietnamVet says:

    Colonel,
    The basic problem is there no economic reasons for the lower classes to support the current 50-state construct of the USA. The Middle Classes’ wealth is being sucked furiously upward to the globalist less than one percent. Once Southern California is 51% mestizo, there will be no cultural or political reasons to stay united. The leader of the American Empire will never let himself to be called the Loser of Cali. Democracy along with law and order is withering away. A Koch Brothers Constitutional Convention will officially author the splintering apart of the USA. For defense, the LA Basin will ally Northern Mexico cartels. After the revolt and if WWIII is somehow avoided, North America will partition into 20 or so ethnic city-states run by corporations with the remainder no man’s lands.
    Note; Washington State and Oregon will split down the Cascade Mountain Range. The Bundy Family in Eastern Oregon and Nevada won their freedom after seizing federal land due to ethnic/religious jury nullification and incompetent federal prosecutors.

  34. Cortes says:

    How much of a sanctuary state is a sanctuary state likely to be in the event that the federal authorities make the environment for illegal immigrants uncomfortable in other states in the Union?
    Yes, I’m an outsider, but I’m curious about how California would cope if “internal illegals as refugees” flocked to the land of sanctuary when the heat is applied elsewhere.

  35. Charles says:

    West Virginia.
    It would be efficient to allow the coastal stretch from SF to SD to depart the union and then encourage the well watered parts of northern and central California to do a West Virginia. LA cannot water itself nor can San Fran.

  36. kooshy says:

    California is the largest and biggest economy in US, CA. is the 6th largest economy in the world. For fact, without California, US will not be the largest economy in the world, for sure without CA.’ economy, Dollar’ fiat status will recede and there goes US economy. I don’t think CA. want or can secede from the federal government, so please don’t panic, but IMO, current Ca. economy (specially Agriculture and Construction) can’t be competitive or even functional without cheap labor however that can be provided to the state.
    Sure, It is a majority liberal state, so what? it’s been like this, in this last 45 years I have seen, nothing has changed, life went and is going on without intruding to anybody else’s life in any other state, California is not a burden to US, or US laws, federal government is, and most be, in charge and control of the national borders, not the state of California. Brown a very liberal guy, overall has not been a bad governor for this state, IMO, he is much better than Arnold.

  37. bt says:

    I’d be happy to let Texas go…

  38. Richard says:

    If the Californian “Resistance” politicians are clever, they will arrange a federal bailout for their near-insolvent California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) before declaring secession.
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-24/former-calpers-board-members-shocking-admission-calpers-near-insolvency-it-needs

  39. mtnforge says:

    I’m nothing if not a believer in secession from the state as it stands today, more along the line of abolition from the administrative tyranny we have today which usurped the compact theory of the 13 original sovereign nation states when the US Constitution was introduced, instead of the mandate of ironing out the issues of the Compact the nations sent their representatives to Philadelphia to deal with after the revolution against king George was concluded.
    Having said that, I have a certain amount of political empathy for those in California attempting to seceded from the Union. I hope them well, the dirt people themselves, not some of their leaders agenda’s and political ideology not withstanding.
    The underlying issue here is something rarely voiced. until that time, if it comes, California is successful in obtaining sovereign nation state status, it exist not in a vacuum. The criminals who have invaded our union. thru illegal means, are just that, criminals, no matter how nice they may be, or not, as people. Of which, not just a few are serious criminals as in life long professionals, committing rape, phedophelia, and other violent sex crimes, never mind they not having respect for OUR rule of law to start with.
    Until California can control its land border with the rest of the lower 47 states, these “protected people” they are harboring from constitutional mandate of the executive to protect out borders from invasion of all kinds, are free to venture out willy nilly into the other states and rape/pillage, commit all types of crimes, the rest of the union does not want anything to do with.
    In effect the rest of us have to suffer the crime wave these illegal invaders commit, so ideological net-bolsheviks and every kind of perveerted bleeding heart marxist can carry their indignity of the rest of us daring to question their political/cultural purity in their sleeves.
    Ah, excuse me. There is something so wrong with this entire picture it beggars the mind.
    As long as we are a Union, its tough shit. The law applies in equality, not equality for the sake if some long march Fabian fantasy of a utopia where the native population and culture is required to bend a knee to such tyranny,
    Because that is what this issue boils down to. My tyranny is OK because I say say so, I say my morals outrank 280 million other peoples long held hard won moral compass, 230 years of jurisprudence, its current state not withstanding, but more so the rank & file dirt people respect for the rule of law, regardless of the political elites having made an unmitigated fucking disaster out of it.
    The double standard here needs to be inshrined for all eternity so future people can gaze upon the presumption of superiority of the ass hats running California into the ground turning it into a continental shit hole.

  40. Dorothy 108 says:

    Northern CA resident, exactly the same here.
    The climate in CA is such that the Republicans have no voice. Example: The CA. GOP did not even run a candidate to run against Kamala Harris for the US Senate in ’16.
    You can get mugged if you even so much as wear a ‘Make America Great Again’ hat.
    Nobody in CA has the nerve to speak up. That is why those people were beaten severely last year in San Jose for the sin of attending a Trump Rally.

  41. iowa steve says:

    TTG, I agree with much of what you say.
    As far as nullification goes, I don’t think any California agency has challenged US immigration laws as unconstitutional. The same could be said regarding interposition. Refusing to cooperate with the feds is a far cry from having a shoot out with them.
    If the US Treasury department informed US local law enforcement that they were now required to hire auditors, accountants andinvestigate and arrest any suspected federal tax cheats, I suspect most would say, “sorry, that’s your job”. Or to make the often cited federal marijuana laws–if the DEA instructed local law enforcement in a legalized marijuana state to begin arresting marijuana users, I think the response would be similar, “sorry, we don’t work for you.
    No doubt every sworn law enforcement officer or elected official in California takes an oath to uphold state and federal law. In failing to enforce federal immigration law, they violate that oath. But a decision on that is up to the voters or state agencies involved.

  42. outthere says:

    I spent some time in Berkeley in the 60’s, studying music, and living in a Maybeck home/cabin. Epitome of Arts and Crafts architecture. The fireplace was big enough to roast an ox, whole.
    I loved Berkeley, and so did my dogs!

  43. SRW says:

    My reading is that under federal law, it is a crime for anyone to enter into the US without the approval of an immigration officer — it’s a misdemeanor offense that carries fines and no more than six months in prison. Many foreign nationals, however, enter the country legally every day on valid work or travel visas, and end up overstaying for a variety of reasons.
    But that’s not a violation of federal criminal law — it’s a civil violation that gets handled in immigration court proceedings. So if a California policeman stops someone for; say a traffic infraction, he is not going to do ICE’s job for them and ask them to prove they are valid US citizens. Big deal. I don’t blame them. However, if a undocumented alien is caught committing a crime, they will turn the culprit over to ICE after determining the individual is an illegal. My, what common sense. Sort of reminds me of the Dred Scott decision where the effect was that a lot of northers ignored attempts to catch runaway slaves even though the Supreme Court stated they were still the property of their southern owners no matter what part of the country they were in.

  44. TV says:

    Where I live, New Jersey and Massachusetts (“Massholes”) are not popular, but outright disdain – no.
    I have travelled quite a bit in the mountain west and have been struck by the general dislike of California and its emigres.
    “We didn’t have drugs or gangs and then the Californians started buying up property and guess what we’ve got now?
    “Drugs and gangs.”
    Said by more than person I met in the mountain west.

  45. We fought our biggest and most destructive war over these issues [N&I or outright secession] and they were largely settled by force majeure.
    The following quote is from a historian who bucks the trend and mentions that Jefferson liked secession.

    The short of it is that Jefferson first came to continental attention with a 1774 pamphlet insisting that the colonies were distinct communities tied to Britain only via a common king; that pamphlet clearly implies that there was no colonial legal tie among the colonies at all.
    Jefferson insisted on the principle of the states’ centrality in North American political life over and over and over, to the point of writing to a powerful political ally in 1799 mentioning that a “scission” (secession) was an option. As he put it then:
    We are … determined … to sever ourselves from that union we so much value, rather than give up the rights of self-government which we have reserved….
    Even though coming from the vice president of the United States, this ought to be no surprise: his Declaration of Independence declared precisely such a “scission” (that is, secession).

    If the government of the USA is Jeffersonian, then it must recognize some secession as legitimate. If the government of the USA does not recognize any secession as legitimate, then the government of the USA is not Jeffersonian.

    it is more possible that I will live to see SST 100 years old than that there will be either a constitutional convention or an amendment allowing secession. You don’t think I know these things are POSSIBLE?

    If the government of the USA effectively prohibits secession, but pretends to permit it, then the government of the USA will no longer attract the admiration of the adherents of Thomas Jefferson.
    The open question, then, is to what degree the ideals of Thomas Jefferson can continue to attract political loyalty on Planet Earth. Perhaps the Jeffersonian thinkers of the world are a tiny minority – a few tens of thousands. Perhaps there are a billion people who are more Jeffersonian than anything else. Only time will tell whether actual Jeffersonian politics will prevail against anti-Jeffersonian force majeure.

  46. turcopolier says:

    gaikokumaniakku
    The present government of the US is certainly NOT Jeffersonian and has not been for a very long time. Jefferson’s authorship of the Kentucky Resolution makes it clear that he thought that even in his own time the government of the US had seized more power from the states than it should have done. There is little doubt that if he had been living at the time of secession he would have followed Virginia out of the Union as did President Tyler. pl

  47. turcopolier says:

    outthere
    Maybeck and the Green brothers are at the head of my list of great American architects. pl

  48. turcopolier says:

    VV
    Explain to me how the Koch Brothers arrange to have a constitutional convention. pl

  49. kooshy says:

    Colonel, both great california architects, especially the Greens, but IMO, in 20th century, no architect tops the work and creativity of FL Wright.

  50. SmoothieX12 says:

    CA. is the 6th largest economy in the world.
    No, it is not, since the way these type of “calculations” are done is mostly a fraudulent monetarist “methodology” which counts bank or real estate transactions, as an example, as value added. The US was de-industrializing with an astonishing speed for the last 30 years and her GDP in general is calculated within Wall Street “framework” of pure monetary values. And that is why we have today capitalization of Facebook which produces nothing, zero (in fact it deducts by providing waste of time and of mental health) being several times larger than that of, say, Boeing which DOES produce tangibles with huge value added. In fact, serious observers do not take US economic data which originates with even US government, not to speak of all those “economic” think tanks, seriously anymore. So, no, California is NOT 6th economy in the world–it is large and is extremely important for overall US economy but all those numbers are grossly inflated. While US today is still arguably 1-2nd economy in the world her GDP is not claimed 19 trillion, not even close–most of it is a creative bookkeeping.

  51. Flavius says:

    The Civil War, the War Beween the States, the War of Northern Aggression appears to have settled the issue of secession for any imaginable situation and attending circumstances. Whether it was settled wisely or justly is another question but it is a question mostly of theoretical or academic interest.
    Immigration law and border control are in the province of the Federal Government and not the Governors, Mayors, Legislatures, or Courts of the States. On the other hand, the Governors, etc, are not compelled to extend affirmative cooperation to the Federal authorities enforcing immigration law. That is up to them, but it comes with consequences.
    On the other other hand, the Federal Authorities should be up front with the Governors, etc as to what those consequences are going to be. One of those consequences should be that the Federal Government will be doing whatever it takes to insure that the law is enforced, whether it is by doubling or tripling the enforcement mechanisms, whatever it takes. No exemptions for California, Oakland, Chicago, New York, or anywhere else. You’ve been advised. See you later.

  52. Max says:

    Up here in the Great White North, we have something called the “Notwithstanding Clause” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_33_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms). It lets provinces and the Federal Parliament override certain parts of the Charter of Rights. But mostly it’s about elected parliaments having the ability to override unelected judges’ interpretations of the Charter. Anglos tend to get vexed when Quebec threatens to invoke it. But pl’s right, it’s mostly just a lot of hand-wringing and then we go back to the hockey game.

  53. Barbara Ann says:

    Sage words from Codevilla in that article and a concrete recommendation:

    Today, states and cities ruled by the Left are seizing disproportionate influence in national politics by counting the votes of non-citizens. California issued drivers’ licenses—de facto voter registration—to a million illegals. Countless localities, such as New York City, Detroit, and Florida’s Broward County, do similar things. A few million votes here and there add up to a wall protecting today’s ruling class as it imposes itself on the rest of the country. Because this fraud so threatens the body politic’s integrity, a federal law requiring positive proof of citizenship for voting in federal elections is a sine qua non of continued national cohesion.

    The wiki on voting rights says specifically re California; “Citizenship status is verified at the DMV when applying for a license”. Is he implying that the DMV is part of some sort of fiendish CA conspiracy to register non-citizens to vote en masse?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_foreigners_to_vote_in_the_United_States

  54. Pat Lang,
    Two regiments. (of cavalry) There might have been two more of infantry and, in that case, you’d be correct.
    WPFIII

  55. Bill H says:

    Dorothy 108
    You live in California and you don’t know how the primary election works? The Republican party entered no fewer that 17 candidates in the primary election for the US Senate against Kamela Harris and seven other Democrats. The top two vote getters were both Democratic females, so that’s who were on the general election ballot, but it is completely untrue to say that the Republican party does not exist in this state.
    In fact, in the greater part of this state geographically it holds a strong majority, and is a minority party only in the major urban areas of SF and LA. San Diego is majority Republican, having voted for a Democrat for president only twice (both times for Obama) since Franklin D. Roosevelt.

  56. Mark Logan says:

    Cortes,
    re: post 37
    The big driver of all this is actually the local PDs. They must police the areas which have large immigrant populations and that means they do not want the residents afraid to talk to them.
    I would venture to guess that if push came to shove the politicians would back down, order the police to behave as Uncle Sam (du jour) demands and then turn the other way when the local police give that policy little more than lip service, and the little will be the occasional times they wish to screw over a bad actor by any and all means available.
    We have a legacy of decades of lax immigration laws to deal with, and reality has a way of catching up to us. Where does one deport one of these perhaps middle aged life-time “illegals”? Are we even able to determine what country they were born in? Will that country admit them? They may have no record of that kind of person’s existence.

  57. Jony Kanuck says:

    Colonel,
    On Canada; no & yes.
    First, this not the country of Vimy Ridge & the Schelde any more. Definitely no longer WASP. The new immigrants are mostly Asian. They are mildly socially & fiscally conservative, after all their main reason for coming here was to get ahead. There is no rebellion or secession in sight. If there was though, I think Trudeau the younger would invoke the War Measures act just like Trudeau the elder. The War Measures act gives the govt dictatorial power. Ottawa is firmly behind the Washington Consensus, as is the business class & the media (2 companies own everything)A breakup of Canada wouldn’t go over well with the 5 ‘Ayes’ & their friends. The population can be pushed into a security state. The only place where Canucks would rise up would be an invasion.

  58. VietnamVet says:

    Colonel
    @51
    The Koch Brothers are six states away from a Constitutional Convention. Virginia is a battleground state. Wisconsin passed it after the following article was written. The same centrifugal forces that elected Donald Trump may convene a convention that would rewrite the Constitution in any way they want including secession.
    https://www.prwatch.org/news/2017/06/13254/koch-convention-rewrite-constitution-roadblocks

  59. “It is a wholesale rejection out of hand of ANY American idea”
    Fascist much?
    That is just demonizing scores of millions of people who have any number of different ideas. In other words, it’s just stupid.

  60. turcopolier says:

    richardstevenhack
    “Fascist” is a bit much since authoritarian governments come in both left and right flavors. pl

  61. turcopolier says:

    Mark Logan
    They have no record of most people’s existence. pl

  62. turcopolier says:

    William Fitzgerald
    9th and 10th Cavalry Regiments, 24th and 25th Infantry Regiment. pl

  63. scott s. says:

    SRW:
    The “personal liberty” laws enacted in the 1850s were opposed by southern states with the argument that USCons IV/2/3 placed an affirmative duty on states to catch fugitive slaves. There isn’t a real parallel with immigration law (making sanctuary somewhat more powerful). Though in the 1850s, Fed law enforcement other than the customs/duties was only really available through the office of US Marshall (except on the frontier where the US Regulars were garrisoned).

  64. turcopolier says:

    scott s
    After the passage of the Posse Comitatus Act in the 1870s the army did not participate in civil law enforcement. pl

  65. SmoothieX12 says:

    Fascist much?
    No, just well-versed in the issues of State and Nation-hood. US resembles nation increasingly less and less and there are very particular ideologies, policies and people who promote those which I merely point out to, which are responsible for this, rather sad, state of the affairs.
    P.S. Hint, nationhood has virtually nothing to do with flag-waving and proclaiming oneself to be of some national origin.

  66. turcopolier says:

    smoothie x12
    All right. What does “nationhood” consist of for you? pl

  67. SmoothieX12 says:

    All right. What does “nationhood” consist of for you?
    In the descending order of importance: Culture as a behavioral matrix (language, obviously, as a starting point)-shared historic experience-race-ethnicity (blood)-politics (vision of own nationhood). That is the mix required for Statehood.

  68. John Minnerath says:

    pl,
    How did Eisenhower deal with Posse Comitatus in 1957 when he sent the 101st to Little Rock?

  69. kooshy says:

    Well to a point I agree with you, that is, since perhaps like you I grew up and worked in the old economy (value added finance economy) which was newer than my dad’s era cash and carry no VAT economy. IMO, we are now well in the digital age on in the “air economy” or cryptocurrency economy when every unit of air is sold for $20000 buckaroos, where one can become a billionaire overnight, for that reason alone CA. is home to more selling air than any other place on the planet, including FB, Google, Twitter, Apple Etc. No matter if understand this new Uber economy or not It’s a fact of life, Ca. it’s a pioneer of this new innovative technology and is been good for state. Better yet, many are moving south to Venice beach, which is now called silicon beach.

  70. outthere says:

    “[T]he Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the State’s officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.” In Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898, 935 (1997), a Montana Sheriff Jay Printz challenged the constitutionality of a federal handgun control scheme that required him and other local law enforcement officers to conduct background checks on prospective handgun buyers, ensuring that no handguns were illegally purchased. In invalidating the law, the Supreme Court stated that Congress cannot require state officers to enforce federal laws. Asserting that it was discovered early on by the framers of the Constitution that “using the states as the instruments of federal governance was both ineffectual and provocative of federal-state conflict,” the Court said that “the Constitution [] contemplates that a State’s government will represent and remain accountable to its own citizens.”
    State (and local) governments also have the right to be free from unwanted regulation imposed at the federal level. In New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144, 166 (1992), the Court noted “we have always understood that even where Congress has the authority under the Constitution to pass laws requiring or prohibiting certain acts, it lacks the power directly to compel the States to require or prohibit those acts.”
    There is a historical discussion from CATO here:
    https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/yes-states-can-nullify-some-federal-laws-not-all

  71. TonyL says:

    kooshy @39,
    Yours is the best comment so far in this California bashing fest 🙂 I’d agreed, so what if California is a majority liberal state. It always has been. I’m a happy resident and Jerry Brown has been great for us.

  72. turcopolier says:

    Tony L
    IMO your assertion that California has always been a liberal state is incorrect. Provide citations please. pl

  73. turcopolier says:

    smoothiex12
    Your criteria define an ethnic people. The citizens of the US are not an ethnic people by your criteria. The French are an ethnic people as are the Han Chinese. There are many states that include peoples not belonging to the ethnic consensus you speak of. Look north of our border with Canada to see and example. pl

  74. kooshy says:

    Colonel, IMO a common language , a natural border, and pride in belonging to a shared history and destiny are the basics to make a nation state. A natural border, i think is when one feels better to belong to inside of the border than the other side, which makes him wants to defend it.

  75. mikee says:

    John: The President has the responsibility to see that Federal law is enforced. (10 U.S.C 333)

  76. Pacifca Advocate says:

    >>>PA and james
    >>>It seems that you missed the whole story of the US Civil War. It is obvious that no >>>state can secede. An attempt to do so would be met with whatever force was necessary.
    >>>pl
    I thought my question rather pointedly accepted this historical fact?
    My question was whether you admit that a lot of poor people in the US might be ready to fight–
    Urban warfare is a bitch, no? “Suburban warfare” is a cake-walk, but that’s not likely to be the endgame that your hypothesized revolt would resolve into.
    I’m just asking: do you really think the only solution to our current civic problems is war? And have you heard of people in the elite branches of government who sincerely believe that our country is headed in that direction?

  77. John Minnerath says:

    mikee,
    True enough, but Ike and his administration got a lot of heat over violating the Posse Comitatus Act at the time.
    I’ve read the Executive Order he wrote to bring in active military, the 101st ABN.
    Too much for me to reference back and forth between all the different Federal Codes and Statutes he used to understand it all.
    I feel Colonel Lang might have some insight on what all went on.

  78. turcopolier says:

    PA
    I did not predict civil war. You have created a strawman to satisfy your agenda’s needs. Poor people would fight what? Deportation of illegal immigrants? No I do not think there will be a poor peoples’ revolt however much you may hope for that. What is likely, I think, if Becerra/Brown etc. continue down the road to active resistance to federal law is that they personally will end up in federal court. Are people in Washington seeking to [provoke a civil war? They are not. pl

  79. Eric Newhill says:

    PA,
    Re; likelihood of civil war – there was an panel of former State Dept, etc. experts convened by (I think) Foreign Policy mag that was asked to estimate the probability of CW2 in the US. Estimates averaged out at 40% to 50%.
    I couldn’t find that article again in my quick search. However, here is another in FP – albeit not a panel – that estimates 60%:
    http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/10/will-we-have-a-civil-war-a-sf-officer-turned-diplomat-estimates-chances-at-60-percent/

  80. turcopolier says:

    john minnerath
    Eisenhower used the Enforcement Acts as justification and authority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enforcement_Acts pl

  81. turcopolier says:

    james
    “a type of social experiment to see if we can all learn to live together on the planet without reverting to ethnic divisions as the basis for identification.” What gave you that idea? pl

  82. John Minnerath says:

    pl,
    Thank you sir. When Faubus used the Arkansas NG to block the black students that must have been the impetus for Eisenhower to Nationalize the states NG and also bring in units of the 101st to enforce the desegregation law.
    Probably not relative then to this discussion of Nullification and Interposition, and Posse Comitatus.

  83. turcopolier says:

    kooshy
    You have to distinguish between an ethnic and cultural “nation,” i.e. the Persians or the French Canadians and a nation state, i.e. someplace like Sweden before it was overrun by Muslim refugees. That Sweden was a country largely inhabited by the same ethnic nation and therefore a “nation state.” A “state” in the international sense is a governmental entity and like Switzerland is not necessarily made up of a single “nation.” BTW, the US is not a nation state. The only thing that holds the country together is the law, i.e., the Constitution. That is being demonstrated in California. pl

  84. kooshy says:

    Thank you sir

  85. TonyL says:

    Col,
    I stand corrected! California has been a blue state only for the last 20 years or so.

  86. turcopolier says:

    ToonyL
    When I lived there as a kid it seemed very rural and Okie immigrant. pl

Comments are closed.