April 08, 2018
South Carolina Threatens Secession over Second Amendment
Timothy Birdnow
South Carolina is again threatening to secede from the Union, this time for a Constitutionally valid purpose. If the Federal government attempts to seize legal firearms the sovereign State of South Carolina says it is gone.
From CBS News courtesy of the Gateway Pundit: "The measure sponsored by Reps. Mike Pitts, Jonathon Hill and Ashley Trantham has no real chance this session. The deadline for bills to move from one chamber to the other is April 10.
In 1860, South Carolina became the first state to declare that it had seceded from the Union.hi"
End excerpt.
Nullification was a concept created by James Madison, the father of the Constitution, and seconded by Thomas Jefferson. In essence, a Federal law normally trumps state law except where the Federal law is blatantly unConstitutional. Madison argued that a state had a right to nullify an Unconstitutional law. Madison and Jefferson made this case in arguing for state defiance of the Alien and Sedition Act. Later, John C. Calhoun argued that states had the right to nullify pretty much ANY Federal law, and if it came down to it to secede to uphold their own sovereignty. The Civil War pretty much put the kabosh on that, but it did not overturn the basic right to nullify unConstitutional laws.
Here is the difference; when South Carolina seceded from the Union it was not because of any unConstitutional law put in motion but because of the legal election of Abraham Lincoln, a man who was a moderate abolishionist. Lincoln had promised to uphold the law of the land, which permitted slavery in the slave states, but that was not good enough for the South Carolina legislature, which nullified the entire Constitution. This is different, as there is a specific Constitutional Amerndment in place, one that is quite clear in intent. It will be the Feds who will be in breach of contract here, not South Carolina.
If California is threatening to secede because the U.S. wants to enforce immigration laws duly passed by Congress (clealry not something meeting the legal requirements for nullification and secession) than South Carolina would be well within her rights to do likewise.
South Carolina is again threatening to secede from the Union, this time for a Constitutionally valid purpose. If the Federal government attempts to seize legal firearms the sovereign State of South Carolina says it is gone.
From CBS News courtesy of the Gateway Pundit: "The measure sponsored by Reps. Mike Pitts, Jonathon Hill and Ashley Trantham has no real chance this session. The deadline for bills to move from one chamber to the other is April 10.
In 1860, South Carolina became the first state to declare that it had seceded from the Union.hi"
End excerpt.
Nullification was a concept created by James Madison, the father of the Constitution, and seconded by Thomas Jefferson. In essence, a Federal law normally trumps state law except where the Federal law is blatantly unConstitutional. Madison argued that a state had a right to nullify an Unconstitutional law. Madison and Jefferson made this case in arguing for state defiance of the Alien and Sedition Act. Later, John C. Calhoun argued that states had the right to nullify pretty much ANY Federal law, and if it came down to it to secede to uphold their own sovereignty. The Civil War pretty much put the kabosh on that, but it did not overturn the basic right to nullify unConstitutional laws.
Here is the difference; when South Carolina seceded from the Union it was not because of any unConstitutional law put in motion but because of the legal election of Abraham Lincoln, a man who was a moderate abolishionist. Lincoln had promised to uphold the law of the land, which permitted slavery in the slave states, but that was not good enough for the South Carolina legislature, which nullified the entire Constitution. This is different, as there is a specific Constitutional Amerndment in place, one that is quite clear in intent. It will be the Feds who will be in breach of contract here, not South Carolina.
If California is threatening to secede because the U.S. wants to enforce immigration laws duly passed by Congress (clealry not something meeting the legal requirements for nullification and secession) than South Carolina would be well within her rights to do likewise.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
12:30 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 370 words, total size 3 kb.
20kb generated in CPU 0.0085, elapsed 0.2438 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.2374 seconds, 157 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.2374 seconds, 157 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
