Dear Arizona;As Justice Antonin Scalia has just written, the SCOTUS opinion against the state of Arizona concerning immigration problems has made the phrase ‘sovereign state’ of no further effect.The primary function of government is to serve the people it represents.
One primary function under that obligation is to protect the population it serves. The SCOTUS opinion states that – if the United States Federal Government has statutory mandate to fulfill that obligation – then the state has no right to supersede the Federal Government when the Federal Government refuses to extend that protection.The effect of the SCOTUS opinion today is to eliminate states’ rights‘ in a major area of the states’ statutory mandate. Put another way, the Federal Government can establish rules that eliminate states’ rights under historical common law.
This author therefore suggests that the state of Arizona call a Constitutional Convention of interested states – to potentially include Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Alaska and perhaps the Carolinas [and any other state wishing to bind itself under such restrictions as herein mentioned] – pursuant to forming a new sovereign nation established under the auspices of the original Constitution of the United States.Such Declaration of Independence should include a rejection of an imperial presidency which reserves unto itself the right to establish and enforce laws as it best sees fit without legislative oversight.
The Declaration should reject all laws and regulations that establish a socialist, communist or dictatorial interpretation of states’ rights or citizen’s rights.Such a federation or commonwealth should recognize in perpetuity the right of any member state to withdraw from the union when the said union jeopardizes the rights, liberties or the pursuit of happiness of said member state and its citizens.
It should recognize the responsibility of the Executive Office as lawfully established to enforce laws properly passed by the legislature of representatives of the people, and to be interdicted against reinterpreting the meaning of such legally passed laws or refusing to enforce said laws.The convention of agreeable states should establish such legal standards as were envisioned by the Founding Fathers of the United States, and should carefully protect states’ rights and individual citizen’s rights.
It is impossible to see any other alternative for states and citizens wishing to protect their Constitutional rights in the face of a runaway Federal Government of the United States, and its various organs, that has all but suspended the founding intent of the original Constitutional Convention.LET FREEDOM RING!!!
- Breaking: SCOTUS Upholds Part of Arizona Immigration Law (sbmblog.typepad.com)
- SCOTUS: Supreme Court rules on health care reform, Arizona’s immigration law (wjla.com)
- No Healthcare Ruling Today As SCOTUS Rejects Parts Of Arizona Immigration Law In Obama Defeat (zerohedge.com)
- Live blog: Supreme Court strikes down most of Arizona immigration law, upholds one part (news.blogs.cnn.com)
- SCOTUS rejects part of immigration law (kshb.com)
- SCOTUS: No ObamaCare Decision Today, Parts of AZ’s SB1070 Struck Down (bokertov.typepad.com)
- Top Court Rules on Immigration Law (huffingtonpost.com)
- Supreme Court upholds most controversial portion of Arizona immigration law; Update: Libs cry ‘racist’ (twitchy.com)
- Sunday Late Night: Turley Proposes Expanding SCOTUS to 19 (firedoglake.com)
- Will SCOTUS uphold Arizona’s ‘papers, please’ law? (dailykos.com)