AUSTIN, TX— Crying, wailing, and the gnashing of teeth rose from Biden administration officials, Democrats, and leftist media talking heads Friday. They reacted with alarm to Texas Governor Greg Abbott's refusal to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling upholding the ongoing willful failure of President Joe Biden to fulfill his duties under the Constitution, citing Texas' right under the same to defend itself.
But under the Constitution, and buried in the annals of complex federalist theory, there is another tool waiting for the Governor to pick up: Nullification.
In his statement released on January 24, Abbott announced, "The failure of the Biden Administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4," namely his failure to enforce border security and immigration laws, "has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this State the right of self-defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas’s constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary."
In good measure, Abbott justified his actions under the U.S. Constitution and the correctness of his actions would seem self-evident and easily understood.
However, should the inevitable warped application of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution be presented, then the political left in our nation has sewed the seeds of its own undoing.
Dr. Joseph Sansone in a blog posted to his substack posited in its title, "Texas Should Nullify Supreme Court Decision." In his column, he cites the Joint Resolution of the Legislature of Wisconsin, circa 1859 among other similar measures in Virginia and Kentucky responding to The Fugitive Slave Act.
He opined, "Governor Abbot should immediately call a special emergency session of the Texas legislature for the purpose of passing legislation nullifying the Supreme Court’s decision. The state of Texas has a basic right to protect its border from a foreign invasion. There is absolutely no justification for the existence of the federal government if it refuses to protect the border and repel a foreign invasion."
Viewing this with a skeptical eye as anyone should, we immediately come to the arguments that State nullification is an archaic constitutional theory, a relic of federalism, a failed method of slave states to resist abolition ultimately silenced by the triumph of the Federal Government in the Civil War.
But something provided pause: what are a few examples of more contemporary, modern instances of nullification?
Shockingly, the Democrats have provided us with the answer: The "Sanctuary" jurisdictions and state "decriminalization" of marijuana. In 2022, Robert Longley wrote for ThoughtCo, "Several states have enacted or considered bills asserting a state’s right to judge federal laws unconstitutional and block their implementation within the state."
While citing numerous untested instances of "nullification" laws in Idaho, Utah, Arizona, North Dakota, and several other Republican-led states, he also noted that in November 2012, both Colorado and Washington voted to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, "essentially nullifying federal drug law and policy."
He added "Today, the recreational use of marijuana is legalized in 18 states and the District of Columbia. In addition, the medical use of cannabis is legal, with a doctor's recommendation, in 36 states."
He also observed that dating back to the 1980s seven states and dozens of major American cities (New York City for one) declared themselves through state laws, and county and city ordinances to be "sanctuary" jurisdictions that openly and blatantly obstruct and defy federal laws without consequence.
Even individual police departments and state agencies routinely refuse to comply with ICE retainer orders as a matter of policy, with impunity.
In short: Democrat governments and agencies didn't just open the door with these policies openly, blatantly, flagrantly, and routinely violating federal laws and regulations, they blew the door off of the hinges, shattered the frame, and rendered a load-bearing wall structurally unstable.
The concept is quickly taking hold among commentators. Matt Locke, host of Voice of the Working Man Podcast wrote to X Wednesday, "It's called "nullification" The constitution gives the states the right to nullify the unconstitutional edicts of a runaway government. Good for Texas."
Author Russel Madden similarly explained, "Nullification is not just a theory. It’s an essential component of a proper system of checks and balances. The states created the federal gov. If the FG consistently violates its contract with the states, they have the right to declare X null and void."
Pandora's box isn't open, it's a pile of splinters on the ground. And at the end of the day, it will come down to a simple question of use of force. Who will choose to use force, and who will back down?
But under the Constitution, and buried in the annals of complex federalist theory, there is another tool waiting for the Governor to pick up: Nullification.
In his statement released on January 24, Abbott announced, "The failure of the Biden Administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4," namely his failure to enforce border security and immigration laws, "has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this State the right of self-defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas’s constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary."
In good measure, Abbott justified his actions under the U.S. Constitution and the correctness of his actions would seem self-evident and easily understood.
However, should the inevitable warped application of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution be presented, then the political left in our nation has sewed the seeds of its own undoing.
Dr. Joseph Sansone in a blog posted to his substack posited in its title, "Texas Should Nullify Supreme Court Decision." In his column, he cites the Joint Resolution of the Legislature of Wisconsin, circa 1859 among other similar measures in Virginia and Kentucky responding to The Fugitive Slave Act.
He opined, "Governor Abbot should immediately call a special emergency session of the Texas legislature for the purpose of passing legislation nullifying the Supreme Court’s decision. The state of Texas has a basic right to protect its border from a foreign invasion. There is absolutely no justification for the existence of the federal government if it refuses to protect the border and repel a foreign invasion."
Viewing this with a skeptical eye as anyone should, we immediately come to the arguments that State nullification is an archaic constitutional theory, a relic of federalism, a failed method of slave states to resist abolition ultimately silenced by the triumph of the Federal Government in the Civil War.
But something provided pause: what are a few examples of more contemporary, modern instances of nullification?
Shockingly, the Democrats have provided us with the answer: The "Sanctuary" jurisdictions and state "decriminalization" of marijuana. In 2022, Robert Longley wrote for ThoughtCo, "Several states have enacted or considered bills asserting a state’s right to judge federal laws unconstitutional and block their implementation within the state."
While citing numerous untested instances of "nullification" laws in Idaho, Utah, Arizona, North Dakota, and several other Republican-led states, he also noted that in November 2012, both Colorado and Washington voted to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, "essentially nullifying federal drug law and policy."
He added "Today, the recreational use of marijuana is legalized in 18 states and the District of Columbia. In addition, the medical use of cannabis is legal, with a doctor's recommendation, in 36 states."
He also observed that dating back to the 1980s seven states and dozens of major American cities (New York City for one) declared themselves through state laws, and county and city ordinances to be "sanctuary" jurisdictions that openly and blatantly obstruct and defy federal laws without consequence.
Even individual police departments and state agencies routinely refuse to comply with ICE retainer orders as a matter of policy, with impunity.
In short: Democrat governments and agencies didn't just open the door with these policies openly, blatantly, flagrantly, and routinely violating federal laws and regulations, they blew the door off of the hinges, shattered the frame, and rendered a load-bearing wall structurally unstable.
The concept is quickly taking hold among commentators. Matt Locke, host of Voice of the Working Man Podcast wrote to X Wednesday, "It's called "nullification" The constitution gives the states the right to nullify the unconstitutional edicts of a runaway government. Good for Texas."
Author Russel Madden similarly explained, "Nullification is not just a theory. It’s an essential component of a proper system of checks and balances. The states created the federal gov. If the FG consistently violates its contract with the states, they have the right to declare X null and void."
Pandora's box isn't open, it's a pile of splinters on the ground. And at the end of the day, it will come down to a simple question of use of force. Who will choose to use force, and who will back down?
For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments
2024-01-27T19:35-0500 | Comment by: Charles
LAW OF THE LAND The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U. S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for a law which violates the Constitution to be valid. This is succinctly stated as follows: "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5. US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 173,K (1803)
2024-01-27T19:37-0500 | Comment by: Charles
Look up Convention of States. We need to redefine the role of the Federal Government
2024-01-27T19:37-0500 | Comment by: Charles
Look up Convention of States. We need to redefine the role of the Federal Government, they are out of control.
2024-01-28T01:31-0500 | Comment by: James
The States in the USA are sovereign over the federal government. They created the USA and they can withdraw or disregard federal statutes at will. What Biden has done is treasonous in allowing unvetted criminal invaders (i.e. illegal aliens) to cross our border unrestricted. Governor Abbott and the others are absolutely correct in telling the president to pound sand. And any attempt to outlaw militias is completely wrong and must be stopped. Our liberty was won by militias who stood up to the British Crown. And they are still necessary to prevent losing our freedom by misguided leftists!
2024-01-28T09:01-0500 | Comment by: Karen
In Tennessee we have legislation for 2024 that would create 5 pathways in which to invoke Nullification. We have an organization working to support this bill and get it passed. TN Citizens for State Sovereignty. Join us at: tncss.substack.com and to learn more about Nullification go to our website: tncss.weebly.com You can get a copy of the legislation from the website and take it to your state legislators. The bill is: HB0726/SB1092 Feel free to use the contact form on the website to contact me personally.
2024-01-28T09:29-0500 | Comment by: Judy
I think all conservative states should secede, separating themselves from federal government. The only states that will fail are those who stay and depend on the federal government.
2024-01-28T18:04-0500 | Comment by: Merlin
If you notice the Texas national guard and the guard from several other states are backing The Texas Governer! If you are following this closely and getting information from other sources than the Mainstream liars, you would know that the Border Patrol is also defying Biden and working with the Guard instead of against them!! Things are heating up down there and Biden could start a major incident if not a civil war! Our Military will NOT fire on the Guard Units. Just about the only option Biden has left is to try and call in the UN. That will start a shooting war!!
2024-01-30T10:28-0500 | Comment by: Michelle
Every state in the U.S. are sovereign as per our Constitution. That is exactly as our founders meant while forming this great nation. That means that Anything that is Not written in the Constitution is the States' rights/duty to do/oversee as they see fit. The federal government has gotten too big and too powerful for our own good. This is exactly what our founders did Not want. And they say President Trump is tyrannical?!!!
2024-02-02T01:57-0500 | Comment by: joseph
Excellent analysis of the issue.