WLO banner ad

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Nullification is not a radical idea. It is a legitimate tool against oppresion.


Play along with me here...

Suppose the federal government declares an emergency and decided it needed to put some soldiers up in private residences for a short time. Some owners of such private residences are not happy with this. They refuse to comply.

The federal Order requiring this housing of soldiers in private residences against the wishes of the property owners is a pretty clear violation of the Third Amendment. I think we could all agree on that. (The Third Amendment says, in pertinent part: "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner..." .)

Do you believe the Owner of the property has a right to disobey the federal Order and refuse to quarter soldiers in his home? Do you believe the local should Sheriff assist the home owner?

If so, you believe in nullification. Imagine that.

Before slavery ended, the federal government passed a law that said any alleged runaway slave had to be returned to the person claiming ownership without any due process for the alleged slave. What if a state refused to hand over such a person to federal agents, in clear violation of the federal law? Would that state be in the right?

If you think so, you believe in nullification. Imagine that.

During World War II, the federal government ordered Japanese Americans - including citizens - rounded up and put in camps. What if the Governor of a State refused to comply with that order. Would that Governor be correct?

If you think so, you believe in nullification. Imagine that.

The first example has not happened. Yet. The second did. So did the third. There are many other real life examples for those that wish to find them.

Nullification is not a crazy, radical idea. It is merely a tool against oppression.

No comments:

Post a Comment