Nullification And Void

Despite a 150 years of legal precedent since the Civil War, Arizona State Senate President Russel Pearce (the same meathead behind the state's unconstitutional immigration law) is dredging up the practice of nullification again, proving that the Constitution apparently means whatever Russel Pearce says it means.

Members of the Arizona Legislature, led by Republican Senate President Russell Pearce, have introduced a bill that attempts to grant the state the power to ignore federal laws it does not want to comply with. 

If passed and signed into law, Senate Bill 1433 would create a 12-member committee within the state legislature with the power to review and recommend to the full Legislature laws they think are unconstitutional. 

 The full Legislature would then have the power to nullify the federal statute by a majority vote.

"The committee shall recommend, propose and call for a vote by simple majority to nullify in its entirety a specific federal law or regulation that is outside the scope of the powers delegated by the People to the federal government in the United States Constitution," the bill reads. "The committee shall make its recommendation within thirty days after receiving the federal legislation for consideration and process."

According to the bill, "no authority has ever been given to the legislative branch, the executive branch or the judicial branch of the federal government to preempt state legislation."

The legality of the proposed legislation is questionable, as it runs counter to Article VI, Clause 2 and the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, which have been interpreted as making federal law trump state law.

Article VI of the Constitution, commonly known as the Supremacy Clause, states that, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Likewise, in a set of decisions that has come to be known as the "incorporation doctrine", the Supreme Court of the United States routinely ruled that the due process clause of the 14th Amendment prevents state and local governments from violating most provisions of the Constitution's Bill of Rights.

No authority given over state legislation, except for, you know, Article VI.  You know, if Arizona doesn't want to play ball being one of the United States, well there's history there.  South Carolina tried this back in 1832, and by 1833 (and after a Congressional resolution authorizing President Andrew Jackson to use military force against the state) South Carolina relented.

But the concept of nullification isn't just limited to Arizona.  Idaho wingers want out of Obamacare citing the 10th Amendment as justification for pretty much ignoring whatever federal laws they don't like (which is basically all of them).  A couple other states, including Texas, are waiting to see how Idaho and Arizona's nullification bills turn out.  Even Idaho's Attorney General has said...twice now...that the issue of nullification has been decided and that the judicial branch will eat this legislation alive.

But it doesn't matter.  The point here is to make people hate the Federal government, at least one that allows Democrats to control parts of it.  An all Republican government, well somehow I'm betting these clowns wouldn't have any problem with that.