The irony here is that the issue of concern to the author is an explicit element of the Constitutional contract, rather than an arbitrary change to it or a dismissal of one of its terms. Had the federal government passed a law asserting that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to Hawaiians, that would have been a violation of the contract; the Hawaiian government would be right to oppose it. But the facts are the other way around. By applying for statehood, Hawaii agreed to abide by the Constitution as it stands; it could not claim afterward that it agreed “except for that inconvenient ‘right to keep and bear arms’ stuff.”
I have no idea what would follow were Hawaii to announce that it is seceding from the Union. In the fantasy case of a successful secession, Hawaii would no longer be bound by the Constitution’s prescriptions and proscriptions. In the real world as it stands today, Hawaii has agreed to the Constitutional contract; therefore, the Second Amendment is binding on Hawaii. Nullification and Interposition are irrelevant to the matter. Charlton Allen should not have mentioned them at all. I cannot imagine why he did so.
Read the whole thing which discusses how the Civil War did not establish nullification.
8 comments:
It appears you are ignorant of commie locals ability to pick and choose the various suppressions they want. You better watch your CRIME THINK! You're heading for a cancelation MISTER!
How many carrier groups does the Supreme Court command?
Close the bases, let them 'try' to survive on tourism...
Take the US out of there, somebody else will take over, probably the Chinese.
They don't realize how good they have it.
To the left, laws....ALL laws including the Constitution are irrelevant unless they can be used and abused in service to the lefts evil agenda.
Nullification is too often seen through the lens of CW1. In fact, it has a rich history dating back to the Founding era. The first incident of which I am aware was the nullification of the Alien and Sedition Acts by Kentucky and Virginia. The resolutions doing so were drafted by Jefferson and Madison who I dare say knew a thing or two about the Constitution. Northern nullification of the Fugitive Slave Act was an accelerant to CW1.
More recently, states have attempted to nullify Federal laws re MJ, immigration and guns. Pretty much been soft nullification where the states refuse to cooperate on enforcement but some of the CA efforts have been close to the line on immigration.
Nullification of the 2A is another matter entirely as that is a God-given right and only secondarily a part of a contract between the Feds and the states. Theoretically, God should smite them but since he doesn't seem inclined to micromanage things, it is up to the Supreme Court which has declined to do so. The Aloha spirit BS was an easy slam dunk but the Supremes refused to hear it.
They must secede from the union, or want to anyway
Great and astute comment sir. Its a shame that more states are not willing to defy Washington when it discards the Constitution and the laws of the USA. Thank God that Texas and Florida have ignored the USG regarding immigration excesses.
Post a Comment