Writing for Hot Air’s Green Room last week,Patrick Ishmael declared that nullification was unconstitutional and cited a number of columns from organizations such as The Heartlander and The Heritage Foundation as proof. Ishmael’s post was mostly a continuation of a discussion,as he calls it,between him and David Roland,of the Freedom Center of Missouri,regarding a bill in the Missouri house to nullify the Affordable Care Act (Obama care). You can view that exchange here.
It appears that Ishmael’s arguments stem either from a poor understanding of history and political science,or serves as a defense of the centralized state. It’s my attempt here to set the record straight on the history of nullification,its uses,and defend the states and the people from the damaging effects of federal overreach and those who would aid it.
In The Heartlander piece Ishmael is quoted by the author and had this to say regarding the Missouri house bill:“This approach is toxic. There are better ways of trying to mitigate the problems inherent in the law than going this route.” In the same piece,Matthew Spalding,who is the vice president of American studies at the Heritage Foundation,says rather than states nullifying unconstitutional laws,they should look to the Supreme Court or throw bums out. If that doesn’t do the trick,then the states should call for a convention.
Read more at The Tenth Amendment Center. By Joel Poindexter.
No related posts.