Growing defiance

More citizens ignoring federal law -- much like the federal government

  • Follow Editorials

You may have heard the word “nullification” bandied about recently. It’s basically a fancy word for ignoring a law.

Juries sometimes do it, if they think enforcement of a law will result in an injustice. Merriam-Webster defines nullification as “the action of a state impeding or attempting to prevent the operation and enforcement within its territory of a law of the United States.”

And now, increasing numbers of sheriffs and others across the country are publicly saying they will engage in nullification if faced by federal gun or health-care laws they find unconstitutional.

Ignoring laws is rarely a good thing. We’d say never – but we’re reminded of Rosa Parks’ and other civil rights icons’ peaceful defiance of the immoral laws and customs of segregation.

An increasing number of folks are no less convinced that Washington is trampling on other civil rights.

Sheriffs in Idaho, Oregon and Texas have announced their intent not to go along with expected gun control laws. Other officials have said they won’t enforce the health-care law. A state representative in Tennessee wants to make it a crime to enforce gun or ammunition bans in that state.

And several hundred gathered at the South Carolina capitol recently for a “Nullify Obamacare” rally. They were promised efforts by several state officials to block “federal encroachment.”

There’s a proud tradition of states’ rights in South Carolina – exemplified not that long ago by the light bulb. When federal law began phasing out production of the incandescent light bulb, South Carolina lawmakers passed “The Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act” to allow for its production and sale within the state, which Washington can’t prevent.

But nullification has rarely seen this much favor since the Civil War, and may only gain steam if Washington continues down the path of trying to run everyone’s lives.

Washington may have no one but itself to blame for the rise of the nullification movement – particularly the Obama administration, which has set the standard for ignoring the law.

It was this administration, after all, that decided not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act. Even though the “Dream Act” can’t pass Congress, Mr. Obama “enacted” it via executive order – announcing that his administration would not deport illegal aliens who came here as minors. There is no such exception in the law.

His administration also announced that marijuana crimes would not be a “priority” – again, picking and choosing which laws to enforce.

When it appeared the defense industry might have to issue layoff notices to workers because of impending “sequestration” cuts just before the November election, the Obama administration encouraged contractors to ignore the law that seemed to require the notices.

The Obama administration also tried to block enforcement of state anti-voter-fraud laws last year.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate has failed to pass a budget as required by law the past four years – and the Obama administration has announced it won’t have a federal budget ready by the statutory deadline.

We don’t endorse the ignoring of laws. But if there’s a growing sentiment of defiance toward enforcement of federal laws in the land, Washington can’t exactly throw stones.

It has perfected the art.

Comments (70) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
KSL
144844
Points
KSL 01/28/13 - 10:29 am
11
2
Some probably voted for him

Some probably voted for him twice in each election.

Bizkit
35764
Points
Bizkit 01/28/13 - 10:32 am
7
2
Y'all forget Obama is a

Y'all forget Obama is a pseudointellectual who seems to believe there are 57 states and we are a democracy with mob rule (he sho like to gain mob voice doesn't he) rather than a republic. I can't believe he actually taught a course related to the constitution-another Ward Churchill-like character likely and the dumbing down of America. Let me guess all his ole students are members of the Communist Party USA. hee,hee,hee.

dichotomy
37659
Points
dichotomy 01/28/13 - 10:40 am
8
1
"holding that states may not

"holding that states may not nullify federal law"

Well, the citizens can nullify by just ignoring the law. I submit to you the federal law called "Prohibition". It was nullified by the citizens. As will any attempt to ban, register, and eventually confiscate painted black semi-automatic self defense weapons.

And Techfan....:they're not above using any means available to see that the will of most Ammericans is thwarted."

This has nothing to do with the will of the people. The will of the people opposed Obamacare but they shoved it down our throats in the middle of the night. The will of the people does not favor weapons bans, either. The will of the people favors background checks and doing something about the mentally ill nutcases roaming the streets. But the tyrannical regime that forced Obamacare on us is now trying to force weapons bans and retroactive gun registration on us, and that is NOT the will of the people. I have already personally nullified anything they might pass.

Obama has nullifed many laws with executive orders. He has nullified the law with illegal recess appointments. The Senate has nullifed the law by not passing a budget in, no, almost 4 years. So nullifying is a valid tactic. I sincerely hope the Republicans in the House contain Obama to only things he can do by executive order. Hopefully one day a Republican president will nullify Obama's presidency by rescinding all of Obama's executive orders.

Little Lamb
49260
Points
Little Lamb 01/28/13 - 10:42 am
8
2
DOMA

Obama and his Attorney General have stated they will not enforce the federal Defense of Marriage Act. What's different about that and the sheriffs saying they won't enforce federal gun control laws?

justthefacts
25486
Points
justthefacts 01/28/13 - 10:47 am
9
1
Electorial College

Techfan has always wanted it eliminated. Now he accuses the "right wing" of advocating his very position.

Willow Bailey
20605
Points
Willow Bailey 01/28/13 - 11:21 am
5
1
Sheriff's don't enforce

Sheriff's don't enforce federal laws anyway, so why should this one be any exception?

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 01/28/13 - 11:54 am
8
2
JTF....your 10:47 post is
Unpublished

JTF....your 10:47 post is right on the money.....more hypocrisy from the left.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 01/28/13 - 11:56 am
8
2
Willow....The Obama
Unpublished

Willow....The Obama administration even sued AZ for passing a law that required them to enforce federal law....... Maybe Obama needs to list the laws that he personally wants enforced, like the good King he thinks he is.

Darby
29544
Points
Darby 01/28/13 - 11:58 am
8
2
Following Gore's loss in 2000....

.... there was an anguished hue and cry from the left, lamenting the Electoral system and lobbying for its death in favor of a popular vote. Now the same left is suffering from short term memory loss.

Darby
29544
Points
Darby 01/28/13 - 12:07 pm
10
2
Face it, lefties....

every single civil rights protest, each and every one, was a cry (and rightly so) for nullification of existing law.

When good people are pushed too far, they reach a point where they will NOT be pushed further. Then they begin to push back!

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows".

OpenCurtain
10049
Points
OpenCurtain 01/28/13 - 12:06 pm
10
1
TechFan you make this too easy sometimes

Your earlier post of a list issues could just as easily be applied to the Social Progressives you now support.

Or have you forgotten Cynthia McKinney's 2 street wide 8 mile long district designed just to keep her elected?

Look back 40 years and remember that your beloved Democrat Party was still using Jim Crow laws that IT put in place and enforced with fire hoses, dogs and shotguns, since the 1880's. Remember the much needed votes of the Republican party, were used to repeal these laws and vote in the Civil Rights Act. With MORE Democrats voting NO than yes. Also remember the Democrats ruled the South and US Congress not the Republicans, until 1994, and never lifted a finger either?

So tell me why you support a party with a documented history of racism, bigotry, lynchings, fire hoses, dogs and blame the Republicans again?

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 01/28/13 - 12:19 pm
6
2
3 words.....Senator Robert
Unpublished

3 words.....Senator Robert Byrd.

Willow Bailey
20605
Points
Willow Bailey 01/28/13 - 12:21 pm
6
2
Yes, Angie, or dictator.

Yes, Angie, or dictator.

owensjef3
5639
Points
owensjef3 01/28/13 - 01:08 pm
3
15
Shameful
Unpublished

This piece is shameful and dangerous, fear everyone!

harley_52
26117
Points
harley_52 01/28/13 - 01:01 pm
9
1
Patriotic...

This piece is timely, perceptive, and patriotic. America is the land of the free and the home of the brave. America was founded on the principle of individual freedom and the abhorrence of political oppression.

A lawless and oppressive government cannot succeed.

owensjef3
5639
Points
owensjef3 01/28/13 - 04:01 pm
3
10
I'm willing to die for my right
Unpublished

I'm willing to die for my right to own a m60 machine gun, yea right. lol

Willow Bailey
20605
Points
Willow Bailey 01/28/13 - 01:24 pm
9
3
There is the mindset that

There is the mindset that this administration counts on.

KSL
144844
Points
KSL 01/28/13 - 01:29 pm
9
2
The problem is that an

The problem is that an outright uprising is just what obama and cronies want, an excuse to declare martial law.

harley_52
26117
Points
harley_52 01/28/13 - 01:55 pm
6
1
I Don't See...

....an "outright uprising" as a possibility under current circumstances. What's far more likely is the defiance of unconstitutional directives, or even laws, by the citizenry and a refusal to enforce same by many law enforcement agencies.

The "uprising" would come when citizens are brutally persecuted for their civil disobedience which, I'm sure, the current government is quite capable of inflicting.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 01/28/13 - 02:05 pm
6
3
Sad that there are those that
Unpublished

Sad that there are those that believe that defending the Constitution is "shameful." Sad indeed.

Owensjef...did you know that you DO have the right to own an M-60 machine gun....if you have enough money to pay the tax. Are you ok with restricting that right to the wealthy? I bet if there was such a restrictive tax on your right to say..............VOTE, you would be screaming.

harley_52
26117
Points
harley_52 01/28/13 - 01:58 pm
8
3
"I willing to die for my right to own a m60 machine gun"

As is typical with those who argue your side of the discussion, you misstate the issue.

Why don't you people deal with the real issues rather than the imaginary ones?

owensjef3
5639
Points
owensjef3 01/28/13 - 02:09 pm
3
9
I think this is silly and
Unpublished

I think this is silly and dangerous talk, the talking heads are just trying to get ratings and make money. I hope people will not act on some of the silliness that I've read and seen.

owensjef3
5639
Points
owensjef3 01/28/13 - 02:11 pm
3
11
Harly you can slow down with
Unpublished

Harly you can slow down with that "You People"

harley_52
26117
Points
harley_52 01/28/13 - 02:25 pm
9
3
owensjof3

The term "you people" is perfectly appropriate.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 01/28/13 - 02:43 pm
7
3
"Harly you can slow down with
Unpublished

"Harly you can slow down with that "You People""

Huh?

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 01/28/13 - 02:51 pm
7
2
Owensjef. Why is it silly
Unpublished

Owensjef. Why is it silly and dangerous talk to speak of defending your Constitutional Rights? Was it silly and dangerous when Rosa Parks defied the law by refusing to give up her seat on the bus?

harley_52
26117
Points
harley_52 01/28/13 - 02:53 pm
7
2
"Huh?"

Who knows, maybe it's another term that the PC police have removed from common usage, or somehow redefined to mean something normal people don't get. You know, like "gay," or "invest," or "progressive."

Jon Lester
2480
Points
Jon Lester 01/28/13 - 02:53 pm
8
1
The Feds had superior firepower at Ruby Ridge and Waco
Unpublished

but it didn't do them any good on the public relations front, did it? And that was before two decades of technological advancement and citizen empowerment via social media. It wouldn't take many such incidents for any administration to lose the consent of the governed. Who needs a tank when you have a smart phone?

Willow Bailey
20605
Points
Willow Bailey 01/28/13 - 03:00 pm
4
2
Gee, now, we are not even

Gee, now, we are not even people?

Fiat_Lux
16445
Points
Fiat_Lux 01/28/13 - 03:06 pm
9
2
Oh, great! Jeff Owens is back

to share and spread his love, joy, mutual respect and tolerance! Oh, happy day!

You betcha.

Back to Top
loading...
Search Augusta jobs