NDAA Nullification: Tennessee Bills Propose Kidnapping Charges for Federal Agents...

[Zulu Cowboy]

Thank God, I live in Tennessee!

Zulu Cowboy

- - - - - - - - -

NDAA Nullification: Tennessee Bills Propose Kidnapping Charges for Federal Agents

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012/02/ndaa-nullification-tennessee-bills-propose-kidnapping-charges-for-federal-agents/

State and local resistance to the detention provisions contained in the National Defense Authorization Act continues to grow, rapidly emerging as a nationwide movement.

The Tennessee legislature will consider HB1629 and SB2669 in the 2012 session. The legislation would effectively nullify the detention provisions in the NDAA and would also require federal agents making an arrest in the Volunteer State for any reason to first obtain written permission from the county sheriff.

This bill declares that any federal law purporting to require local or state law enforcement agencies to act at the direction of the federal government or the United States military is beyond the authority granted to the federal government pursuant to the United States Constitution, is not recognized by this state, is specifically rejected by this state and is declared to be invalid in this state. This bill further declares that any federal law purporting to give federal agents or employees, including any members of the United States military, the authority of any state or local law enforcement agency of this state, without the express permission of this state, is beyond the authority granted to the federal government pursuant to the United States Constitution, is not recognized by this state, is specifically rejected by this state, and is declared to be invalid in this state.

The act takes aim at indefinite detention provisions in the NDAA. Tenth Amendment Center communications director Mike Maharrey called language in the NDAA vague and overbroad, pointing out that Americans should never simply trust in the good intentions and moral clarity of the president or federal judges to protect their rights.

“It falls on the states to step in and protect their citizens,†he said. “I can’t imagine a more clear-cut application of state and local interposition as a check on federal power. What could be a more palpable, deliberate and dangerous unconstitutional act than the federal government indefinitely detaining an American citizen without due process?â€

The Tennessee bill also “makes it a Class E felony for any official, agent, or employee of the United States government to enforce or attempt to enforce any federal law, order, rule or regulation that is beyond the authority granted to the federal government pursuant to the United States Constitution,†and includes provisions for kidnapping charges if a federal agent were to detain a U.S. citizen in Tennessee under the NDAA.

Rep. Bill Dunn (R-Knoxville) and Rep. Cameron Sexton (R-Crossville) sponsor the House version of the bill. Sen. Stacey Campfield (R-Knoxville) sponsors the Senate bill.

The Volunteer state joins Washington and Virginia considering legislation to nullify detention provisions in the NDAA. And local governments have also stepped up, including El Paso and Fremont Counties in Colorado. While some argue the NDAA doesn’t apply to American citizens, Maharrey said that notion should not stop state and local governments from following James Madison’s admonition to interpose and draw a line in the sand.

“If what supporters say is true and the NDAA does not authorize indefinite detention of Americans, what is the harm in this legislation? Why would anybody oppose it? It does nothing but serve notice that state and local officials will not sit back and allow the federal government to exercise unconstitutional powers – powers supporters claim don’t exist anyway. It simply affirms a fence that supposedly already exists. The only rational I can find for opposing this bill is if they really do want the option of detaining Americans without due process to remain open,†he said. “You can only oppose this legislation if you accept the idea that the federal government has the authority to do whatever it wants with absolutely no check on its actions – Constitution be damned. If you ask me, that’s a lot scarier than whatever terrorist threat they claim to be protecting me from.â€

TAC executive Michael Boldin said he expects other states to soon follow the lead of Tennessee, Virginia and Washington.

“We have pretty strong indications that Rhode Island, Utah, Maine, New Jersey, Oklahoma and other states will be introducing similar legislation soon. This is just a start – and activists all over the country need to contact state legislators right now to voice their support.â€

For model Liberty Preservation Act legislation you can propose to your state lawmakers, click HERE.

To track state and local legislation across the U.S., click HERE.

- - - - - - - - -

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this post is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes…

[Guest bkelm18]

Sounds like a bunch of hot air. I'd like to see TN try and enforce it.

[Reservoir Dog]

Sounds like a bunch of hot air. I'd like to see TN try and enforce it.

Yep. Stupid law, much like the TN Firearms Freedom Act.........just a bunch of useless chest-beating. I really wish our state legislature would quit wasting their time on stuff like this.

[subsonic]

If the feds would stop putting antagonistic language in their bills, it wouldn't be an issue.

[Zulu Cowboy]

All it takes for evil to triumph...is for good men to do nothing.

I can't believe I am seeing these types of responses to something so blatantly unconstitutional?

And on a Tennessee GUN forum...at that!

Go back to sleep kiddies...perhaps there is something good on TV to occupy you?

Your personal liberty is obviously something that's not important enough for you to worry about.

Zulu Cowboy

[Guest NYCrulesU]

All it takes for evil to triumph...is for good men to do nothing.

I can't believe I am seeing these types of responses to something so blatantly unconstitutional?

And on a Tennessee GUN forum...at that!

Go back to sleep kiddies...perhaps there is something good on TV to occupy you?

Your personal liberty is obviously something that's not important enough for you to worry about.

Zulu Cowboy

I couldn't agree with you more. Our state trying to protect us from unconstitutional acts/laws by the federal government and people here are complaining? I'm actually shocked and a little digusted at the first few responses here.

I would support this bill 100%. I am proud to live in a state that recognizes the overstepping of the federal governmemt and sees the potential trampling of the United States Constitution...and is taking measures to resist any and all unlawful acts towards its citizens.

Edited February 8, 2012 by NYCrulesU

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yep. Stupid law, much like the TN Firearms Freedom Act.........just a bunch of useless chest-beating. I really wish our state legislature would quit wasting their time on stuff like this.

And do what? Would you rather the Legislature get back to "touchy/feely" stuff?

As for the hot air comment above, do you not like the states making an attempt at

preserving its rights?

So what would be more productive? Sitting back and waiting longer. Pontificate,

please!

[Guest bkelm18]

I really love these threads. It's humorous, to me at least, that people actually think these stupid laws have any actual chance of being enforced. NDAA needs to be addressed at the national level. Doing anything at the state level is silly and a waste of time because it will accomplish nothing other than saber rattling. If you folks want our state legislatures to waste their time with issues that should be addressed by congress, more power to ya. Edited February 8, 2012 by bkelm18

[Guest bkelm18]

As for the hot air comment above, do you not like the states making an attempt at

preserving its rights?

The states have no power to preserve rights. If you think they do you simply haven't been paying attention the last few years. NDAA is a federal issue, not a state issue. Do you honestly think if TN tried to arrest an FBI or DHS agent for "kidnapping", it would actually work out? Please.

Edited February 8, 2012 by bkelm18

[DaveTN]

The states have no power to preserve rights. If you think they do you simply haven't been paying attention the last few years. NDAA is a federal issue, not a state issue. Do you honestly think if TN tried to arrest an FBI or DHS agent for "kidnapping", it would actually work out? Please.

This.

Our state trying to protect us from unconstitutional acts/laws by the federal government and people here are complaining? I'm actually shocked and a little digusted at the first few responses here.

I would support this bill 100%. I am proud to live in a state that recognizes the overstepping of the federal governmemt and sees the potential trampling of the United States Constitution...and is taking measures to resist any and all unlawful acts towards its citizens.

I don’t think anyone is complaining. It just makes you look like a fool when you make threats you can’t back-up. Kinda like last month when they threatened to ticket New York drivers.

If the state of Tennessee is so concerned about protecting our rights; how about we start with an easy one…. Lets become the 5^th state that recognizes our 2^nd amendment rights to keep and bear arms.

[strickj]

Interesting.

The FBI (and I'm sure other federal agencies) have the authority to arrest local and state law enforcement officers. There is certainly plenty of cases of this happening throughout the country. One case just a few days ago in Connecticut even.

I'm not sure local and state officers would have the authority, even if this bill passes, to arrest federal agents for conducting federal investigations or arrests. In theory, the 10th would give local and state authorities this power. In actual application, I'm not seeing any cases of this actually ever happening. Even searching back to the days of civil rights protest, "ride-ins" desegregation, etc where the feds and guards clashed with local police.

Putting my tinfoil on, let's say this does actually happen. Where local and state police attempt to stop an arrest by the feds. What would actually happen? Who would come out on top? The feds or the local and state authorities?

Looking back to the federal and local clashes in the '50s and '60s, it was always the federal authorities that won. Most of the time the feds won simply from a numbers standpoint. Could we expect the same results today? Would we see hundreds, if not a thousand or two, federal agents from various ABC agencies and maybe a few national guardsmen clashing with local and state police in the streets in front of a detention center?

Edited February 8, 2012 by strickj

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I like the proposed law even if it makes me look like a complete loon to all the "sensible" people.

[Zulu Cowboy]

Well...hopefully, if enough states start making a ruckus about this...Congress will rescind their unconstitutional foray into tyranny.

(FWIW...laws like the recent NDAA, with it's evil provision that allows for the detention of US citizens by the military, without access to the courts; are blatantly unconstitutional, and are thus null and void.)

Perhaps our elected representatives in Washington need to realize the error of their ways, and step back from the brink on this?

That way, we can avoid any type of nasty (fed/state) confrontation...

And if they don't...well isn't that what the 2nd Amendment is for??

Zulu Cowboy

Edited February 8, 2012 by Zulu Cowboy

[subsonic]

The states have no power to preserve rights. If you think they do you simply haven't been paying attention the last few years. NDAA is a federal issue, not a state issue. Do you honestly think if TN tried to arrest an FBI or DHS agent for "kidnapping", it would actually work out? Please.

Since constitutional rights are an extension of natural law and as such serve to illustrate that these rights do not originate with the federal government, individuals and states have every right to push back against an over reaching federal action. It doesnt mean the outcome will be pretty, but it's the entire freaking point. It's clearly stated in Article VI, paragraph 2 that the Constitution "is the supreme Law of the Land, and the Judges in every state shall be bound thereby". If the federal government crafts an unconstitutional act of law, the states are bound by Article VI to reject it.

[JAB]

I like the proposed law even if it makes me look like a complete loon to all the "sensible" people.

Me, too.

Would such a state law do any good if it actually came down to enforcement? Maybe, maybe not. Does it have more potential to do some good than if the state simply did nothing in response? Yep.

Edited February 9, 2012 by JAB

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think the states have a duty to do just that, in the case of garbage law. They don't seem to do it very often, and.

It may be hot air to some, but if the states and the people don't assert their rights under the 10th Amendment,

the government will keep on going unchecked in their assertion of authority over everything.

There is a lot of hot air, but I would rather see it come out from reasons like this one rather

than some ridiculous new appropriation.

if you assume from the outset you've lost, well, you've lost.

[Guest NYCrulesU]

Well said Zulu, Subsonic, Jab and 6.8

Glad some of us agree and aren't the "roll over and do whatever the government says because they are in charge" types.