Raising Arizona (Nullification)

At a Tea Party rally last week, Arizona's State Senate President, Republican Russell Pearce, let the assembled know exactly what he thinks about the United States government:  that we are state citizens, not national ones.

"Most of us weren’t around when the Constitution was written," Pearce said during his speech at an Oceanside Tea Party rally. "But you remember we kind of existed before Congress, the states. We created the Congress, we created the federal government, by contract. Do you know what existed before the Congress? The states."

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

"Do you know, you’re not a citizen of the United States," Pearce continued. "You’re a citizen of a sovereign state. The fifty sovereign states make up United States of America, we’re citizens of those sovereign states. It is not a delegated authority. It’s an inherent authority that states have over the federal government."

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.

Clever students of history may see the similarities between Pearce's statements/Arizona's nullification law and South Carolina in 1832.  Then, Andrew Jackson didn't take kindly to the state saying the Union had no legal rights over the "sovereign state" of South Carolina, and only a Senate compromise led by Henry Clay staved off military action by Old Hickory.  On the other hand, 30 years later the fight was on anyway.

The difference this time around, the recognized Supremacy Clause in the Constitution.

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."

There's no way Senate Bill 1433 will pass legal muster.  So what's Pearce's game?  Is he honestly hoping that the Supreme Court will overturn Article VI somehow?  Is his real target the 14th Amendment, to add the argument that not only does the citizenship part of it need to go, but the incorporation parts as well?  Is the 14th Amendment then the new windmill for the Tea Party to tilt at endlessly?

I'm liking the latter there.  It's the new Roe v Wade.