Saturday, December 28, 2013

Michigan's Nullification of the 2012 NDAA Indefinite Detention

Staff Writer, DL Mullan
News / Government
_____________________________

As of yesterday, Governor Rick Snyder of Michigan signed into law the nullification of the indefinite detention section 1021 of the 2012 NDAA.

Well, sort of.

Tenth Amendment Center’s Mike Maharrey explained: 

“By including a caveat — if such aid would place that state agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the Michigan national guard in violation of the United States constitution, the state constitution of 1963, or any law of this state — the bill is not an express prohibition. Rather, since no official determination has been made on such constitutionality as of yet, it leaves the decision of constitutionality to discretion. But, the new law does provide legal backing for those sheriffs, law enforcement officers, and other agencies and employees, who refuse to assist the federal government in such activities based on their own constitutional determination.”

Wouldn't Americans rather have a complete ban on unconstitutional behavior from every law enforcement agency?

For those who do not know: 
Amendment X

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.
Court Case
Extending the principle applied in New York, the Court in Printz v. United States 5 held that Congress may not “circumvent” the prohibition on commandeering a state’s regulatory processes “by conscripting the State’s officers directly.” 6 Struck down in Printz were interim provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act that required state and local law enforcement officers to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers. “The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers . . . to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case–by–case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.” 7
If this Michigan law holds, then states can do more to offset the unprecedented and overreaching unconstitutional laws Congress has been passing and the Executive Orders being signed by the President of the United States to act as laws that are not under his constitutional purview, for which he has no power to do.

The tide could turn back to reigning in the out of control federal government and restore rights and sanity back to this nation.

Source: Cornell Law, This Nation

Get All the Latest News... Follow the VDP Gazette by Email