Search Helium

Home > Politics, News & Issues > US Law & Justice > Constitutional & Contract Law

Can a state, through passage of law, refuse to honor or obey a federal law that represents unconstitutionally taken central power?

Results so far:

Yes
66% 29 votes Total: 44 votes
No
34% 15 votes

Yes

by Joshua Zambrano

Created on: December 23, 2010

Can a state, or rather an individual, disobey a law which unconstitutionally usurps improper power?  As Abraham Lincoln once put, this is "a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people." I believe to answer this question we must not look at the current interpretation of our law, but whether the system our founders originally designed intended this to be the case.  Would precedent instituted by said founders protect an individual or state who found the law no longer protected the common good?  Should it?

In the Declaration of Independence, we are provided the basis for our freedoms, and the original departure from England.

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

There are 2 principles that should, which MUST, be acknowledged here.  First of all, the just powers of a nation, namely us, the U.S., comes only from the consent of its governed.  If we are denying the majority will of the people, then the powers come into question.  And secondly, when a government fails to fulfill its duty to the people it was created to serve, it may be altered or destroyed by the people in favor of a new democracy.

I will speak plainly.  Should our federal government ever become destructive of the people's will, usurping power to replace their consent, there is precedent in our own Declaration of Independence to, in the same way, rise up against America in the same way that we once rose up against England.  We are given inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, from a Creator.  Should government not respect these, we have a right, and perhaps a responsibility of behalf of our fellow human beings, to stand up and replace the current system.

What American law, tradition, or anything else says is simply beside the point, should it ignore the plain and simple facts written, nay embedded, in the declarations of our founding fathers.  We would be altogether within our rights to stand up as our forefathers did in replacing a system that outlives its responsibility to the will of the people.

Learn more about this author, Joshua Zambrano.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

No

by Nancy Houser

Created on: December 22, 2010

In order to understand the position of U.S. Federal Power regarding control over the states, one needs to return to the 1778 United States Constitution and look at why it was written. Considered a liberal of his time, Thomas Jefferson felt the purpose of the new United States Constitution was three-fold:

Its primary purpose was to create specific federal powers to run the United States government in a more efficient manner, replacing the political timidity that controlled the country from the beginning. The people and the states would receive what remained from the reserves. Its purpose was to prevent state governments from conducting political mischief by the Constitution - especially through the checks and balances. Its purpose was to develop a political system that would prevent easy manipulation by the Federal government over the political system, the states and the U.S. government itself.

According to this, the Constitution "as it originally was written" would have made it impossible for the U.S. government to develop a federal law that represented any unconstitutional central power. In fact, that is why it was written in the first place, with checks and balances. However, many federal laws of today do not honor America or its citizens … they honor greedy men and organizations that control the political and financial systems. Over time, the United States has become a corrupt society where money and power speak louder than truth and honesty - ridiculing the honorable intentions of our early forefathers.

The fact that a state[s] would attempt by law to fight the entire political system is almost laughable – it is much too late. How can any of the states within the United States, through passage of law, get away with refusing or honoring any federal law within the U.S. Federal Power? Can they get away with it by going against corrupt powers within the system?

~ The power of the Federal Reserve

Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to John Wayles Eppes on June 25, 1813, saying, “We are an agricultural nation. Such an one employs its sparings in the purchase or improvement of land or stocks. The lendable money among them is chiefly that of orphans and wards in the hands of executors and guardians, and that which the farmer lays by till he has enough for the purchase in view. In such a nation there is one and one only resource for loans, sufficient to carry them through the expense of a war; and that will always be sufficient, and in the power of an honest government, punctual in the preservation of its faith. The fund I mean, is the mass of circulating coin.” (Source: The Library of Congress - the Thomas Jefferson papers)

The United States Congress has given complete control of all government money to the Federal Reserve, a privately owned secretive central bank. This is where federal power and the states can become easily manipulated, something Thomas Jefferson was against. His legal document was designed located in. According to the Federal Reserve, they are not actually owned by anyone but is considered to be an independent entity within the government - with public purposes and private aspects. They can create money out of nothing by simply printing it and lending it out. And then printing some more … the banking interest is that powerful.

The Constitution controls the relationship between the U.S. government and the states, but the Federal Reserve is not part of the federal government. to protect the Federal government and the states, but the Federal Reserve actually does not have to answer, as it is a separate entity within itself. A front-page story in the Wall Street Journal, Feb. 8, 1993, stated, "The current Fed structure is difficult to justify in a democracy. It is an oddly undemocratic institution. Its organization is so dated that there is only one Reserve bank west of the Rockies, and two in Missouri. Having a central bank with a monopoly over the issuance of the currency in a democratic society is a very difficult balancing act."

Taxes the U.S. citizens pay to the treasury department are actually paid to the Federal Reserve Bank. The IRS is considered a private collection agency for the Federal Reserve System. Its history goes back to medieval Italy, where the Black Hand organization was a debt collector through force and extortion for ruling families. "The moneys held in the general fund of the Treasury may be deposited in Federal reserve banks, which banks, when required by the Secretary of the Treasury, shall act as fiscal agents of the United States." (SourceReserve Act)

No wonder when WikiLeaks threatened to go public with banking documentation, Julian Assange found himself in hot water that went beyond his government and military leaks. Yet, he is threatening to go public in January with the Bank of America documents, causing their stocks to go down whenever the subject comes up. Hopefully, his leaks will also be about the Federal Reserve Act among other banking documents … specifically saying that the stock of Federal Reserve Banks cannot be sold or purchased on any stock exchange. It is to be passed on by inheritance alone as the fortune of the "big rich" of which over half are not of the United States. The other half of the U.S. big rich went under the umbrella by the Republicans when they got the tax bill passed, using the financial situation of unemployed American citizens to force President Obama to side with them. 

~ The control of Federal Law

According to the Standard and Poor's organization, it has been verified that the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States is over half-controlled by large New York City Banks with foreign controlling interest at the top – (1) Rothchild banks of London and Berlin; (2) Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris; (3) Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy; (4)  Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam; (5) Lehman Brothers Bank of New York; (6) Khun, Loeb bank of New York; (7) Chase Manhattan Bank of New York, who controls 11 other Federal Reserve Banks; and (8) Goldman, Sachs Bank of New York. (Source: RusUSA)

In 1797, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson, "All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects of the Constitution or Confederation; not from any want of honor or virtue, as much as downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation." (Source: RusUSA)

With this in mind, let us say the U.S. government needs a couple billion dollars. That amount is printed out by the Federal Reserve Banks – with no hard assets for collateral. The U.S. government is loaned this money at a very high interest rate. The Federal Reserve Bank never had that amount; it simply created it and put the amount in its books. People who are unemployed every day do the same thing – they write a check on their bank account with no funds and then cash it. The Federal Reserve Bank is a paper money manufacturing company that controls the flow of money throughout the world. If they quit printing for a while and make the cash tight – unemployment is created. If they print out more than is needed, inflation is created.

NOTE: (1) The Federal Reserve Act had been passed in 1913 by bankers; (2) In 1865, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Monetary Policy, page 91 of Senate document 23; (3) On June 4, 1963, President Kennedy signed the Executive Order 11110 that would return the U.S. government its power to issue currency away from the Federal Reserve. (4) "Both of these former presidents had also created their own money system to run the United States while they were In office. (5) Once Kennedy died, the money system of the United States was immediately turned over to the Federal Reserve Bank (Source: Trosch Law

Learn more about this author, Nancy Houser.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.


CONNECT WITH US

Read
our blog
Helum for writers

Write and get published
Share with other writers
Polish your freelancing skills

Join our active writing community
Helium Content Source for Publishers

Quality articles from proven freelancers
Exclusive rights, fast turnaround
Brand engagement, business blogging -- our writers do it all

Get custom content today!

INFORMATION


Helium, Inc.
200 Brickstone Square Andover, MA 01810 USA