PDA

View Full Version : When May Courts Lawfully Strike Down State Laws and Constitutional Provisions



allodial
09-21-15, 01:29 AM
When May Courts Lawfully Strike Down, Under the "Supremacy Clause", State Laws and Provisions In State Constitutions?
By Publius Huldah

The courts have lawful authority under the supremacy clause of the federal Constitution (Art. VI, clause 2) to overturn SOME Amendments to State Constitutions and SOME State laws.

It depends on whether the State provision conflicts with the federal Constitution, or with an Act of Congress which is authorized by the Constitution, or with a Treaty which is authorized by the Constitution.

For example: Say a State law says you have to be 45 years old to run for President. That would conflict with Art. II, Sec. 1, clause 5, US Constitution, which establishes 35 years as the minimum age requirement. State laws can’t contradict the Constitution. So a court could properly strike down the State law which says Presidents must be at least 45 years old.

Do you see? The State Law, or State Constitutional provision, or State judicial opinion must CONTRADICT something in the federal Constitution, or Acts of Congress authorized by the Constitution, or Treaties authorized by the Constitution – before it may lawfully be struck down under the supremacy clause.

THE REASON AMERICANS HAVE SUCH DIFFICULTY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT GRASPED THE SIMPLE CONCEPT THAT OUR FEDERAL CONSTITUTION CREATED A NATIONAL GOVERNMENT OF “ENUMERATED POWERS” ONLY.

When acts of the national government are authorized by the Constitution, States can not lawfully contradict such acts.

But when acts of the national government are not authorized by the Constitution, then State legislators, officials and judges are obliged by their Oaths of Office to SPIT ON UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTS OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.

The KEY QUESTION IS ALWAYS – ALWAYS – ALWAYS – ALWAYS: What provision in the federal Constitution authorizes the national government to act on the issue in question?

Now I ask all of you a question: Can you cite Article, Section, and clause of the federal Constitution which authorizes the national government to meddle in “abortion”, “homosexuality”, or “marriage” over the Country at Large?

Can’t find it? What does that tell you? It should tell you that the national government has no authority to meddle in these three areas. My paper on marriage explained this very clearly, I thought……

So when the national government has no constitutional authority to meddle in an area, they may not lawfully strike down State provisions on these areas. When they do so anyway, the States and The People must man-up and resist!

But when the national government has constitutional authority to act in an area, then any State Constitutional provision or State statute in contradiction thereto can properly be struck down under the supremacy clause.

Americans have totally failed to understand that the list of areas in which the national government has constitutional authority to act is…… A VERY SHORT LIST. The list is so short that you all ought to have the list in your heads.

(Source/more (https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/when-may-courts-lawfully-strike-down-under-the-supremacy-clause-state-laws-and-provisions-in-state-constitutions/))

Chex
09-21-15, 03:07 PM
PETE STARK: - The Federal Government can do most anything in this country?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1-eBz8hyoE

That was found at 501 (c) (3) tax exemption. (https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/501-c-3-tax-exemption/)

allodial
09-21-15, 03:26 PM
In the territorial United States, Congress has a legislative democracy that isn't necessarily restrained by all provisions of the Constitution for the United States of America. The Federal States/Territories are said to be at the behest of Congress. The key is determining when Congress is doing something with respect to its territories or with respect to the de jure states.