 |
| "Here's an idea, why don't you actually read the Constitution." |
A new state law that says guns made in Kansas are immune from federal regulations inside the state is unconstitutional, Attorney General Eric Holder said.
“In purporting to override federal law and to criminalize the official acts of federal officers, (the law) directly conflicts with federal law and is therefore unconstitutional,” Holder wrote to Gov. Sam Brownback in a letter dated April 26.
The law (Senate Bill 102) was passed overwhelmingly by both chambers of the Legislature and signed last month by Brownback. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Wichita on Thursday released a copy of Holder’s letter.
“Federal officers who are responsible for enforcing federal laws and regulations in order to maintain public safety cannot be forced to choose between the risk of criminal prosecution by a state and the continued performance of their federal duties,” Holder wrote.
Holder cited the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution in saying Kansas may not prevent federal employees and officials from carrying out their responsibilities.
In his letter, he also wrote that federal agencies “will continue to execute their duties to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations.”
“Moreover, the United States will take all appropriate action, including litigation,” he wrote, “to prevent the State of Kansas from interfering with the activities of federal officials enforcing federal law.”
Booyah bitches!
There are a number of other Republican run states taking similar action, including Alaska, so I have to imagine that Holder has sent out quite a number of these letters. Or soon will have.
You know it never fails to amaze me that these Teabagging assholes, who are ALWAYS bitching that everything President Obama is doing is unconstitutional., have absolutely NO idea what the Constitution even says!
It is like the ONLY amendment that they can quote is the 2nd, and they really don't even understand THAT one!
In fact if I'm not mistaken I believe that Jon Stewart did a segment on the Right's willingness to discard MOST of the Amendments in deference to the 2nd.
Wasn't this same thing brought forward by the guy running the Alaska House - the fat one from Kenai/Soldotna? I believe he invited gun makers to come to the State of Alaska and operate - trying to do the same as Kansas!
ReplyDeleteVote the Republicans out of office - Alaska and nationally. All they do is waste time, money (their lawsuits - watch Parnell in Alaska - he keeps losing, but spends the taxpayers money!).
Republicans = Obstruction (admitted by one of the Congressmen yesterday that it is because they hate President Obama...it's on record!!!)
Sorry, 10:09. That is NOT what Toomey said. I am going to be a bit of a nitpicker here but only because what you said could not be defended in a court of law.
DeleteWhat he said was "....did not want to be seen helping the President do something he wanted to do, just because the president wanted to do it." Nowhere in that statement is anything remotely close to "....they hate President Obama."
If you believe this a too fine a point and not something challengeable, think. How many parents do you know of who tell their children they can't do something? And how many of them HATE their kids? (Were I to be the opposing lawyer, that's what angle from which I would come!)
Too many cases have been lost in court due to simple errors like that. All the opposing team would have to say is "Prove it!" and you're screwed.
Now, having said that, IT IS PROBABLY TRUE they did it because they despise (hate) the president and not because they love him like their kids and are trying to teach the kid there are limits.
However, I believe the only public figure STUPID enough to come right out and actually SAY it is SP and she isn't an elected official.
I suggest you simply harbor your hatred and control it, then turn it to be used as a tool to get rid of all the Repubes you can find over which you have even the slightest control - like your vote!
Leland my dear - you are talking to a 70 year-old American citizen who pays close attention to politics on the national, state and local level. And, I always vote - albeit absentee today due to physical issues.
DeleteI am not an attorney!
I don't have hatred (never use the word 'hate'!) as to Republicans throughout the nation, states and cities. But, I do have dislike of many of them and their party. They obstruct, obstruct, obstruct and have many idiots in their party such as Palin, Cruz, McCain, Boehner, McConnell, etc.
I have MANY good reasons to dislike them - that are factual and researched.
Suggest you keep personal opinions to yourself - you don't even know me assclown! (Sorry, have to use Palin's term - it is one I like in some cases!)
I'm only a few years (3) behind you with the same attention to what's going on, which is why I called you on your comment. It was WRONG!
DeleteJust one question: If you don't use the word "hate" ["I don't have hatred (never use the word 'hate'!)] then what is it doing in your comment?
I still say what you said is patently false! And it isn't a personal opinion, it is fact. The word hate never left Toomey's lips in that quote!
As for not knowing you? Don't care. Besides, most of the comments you will find here at IM are personal. If you don't like being called out for incorrect statements, DON'T MAKE THEM!
AS for your dislike of the Repubes? THERE I can agree with you 100%!
admitted … that it is because they hate President Obama...it's on record!!!
DeleteI don't have hatred (never use the word 'hate'!) …
I'm with Leland. One doesn't have to be an attorney to know how unethical it is to ascribe a loaded word such as "hate" to somebody who didn't use it.
you don't even know me assclown!
And we never will, until you choose a handle (easy to do; doesn't have to be your real name) and use it consistently. For all we know, "Anonymous 12:20 PM" is somebody who—like us—does not know "Anonymous 10:09 AM" but just decided to butt in.
FWIW, I was born in 1941 and my father and mother were born in southern England in 1890 and 1902 respectively.
Let's note that Kansas was part of the Louisiana Purchase; bought and paid for, don'cha know. We'll not hear a glimmer of secession gab from them.
ReplyDeletesecede bitch's ...
ReplyDeleteI must point out that the same type of "authority" allows the Fed to bust medical marijuana shops in California, despite our passing laws that make it legal in our state.
ReplyDeleteIf we're going to apply logic to both pot and guns, shouldn't it be even-handed?
So, what power do state's rights hold?
That's actually a good question that many don't understand. And I'm not saying I do in its entirety either as I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that the answer lies within the concept of intent and impact.
DeleteState law can be more stringent than federal law, but cannot trump federal law. The federal gov still considers cannabis to be a class III drug. Federal employees can still (and do) prosecute, especially if it has impacts beyond state lines and involves transactions. It is my understanding that state employees don't have to enforce federal law (when we aren't talking capitol crimes like murder), that's why an AK Trooper can determine whether he will write you up for possession or not under federal law. Clear as mud right?
The main effort with cannabis legalization was focused on getting cannabis off the class III drug scheduling -directly petitioning the Federal Gov, which if passed, the states would be able to adopt, or not because the states have a right to make the law MORE stringent. (With ATF and the FDA the way it is nowadays, that isn't going to be happening anytime in the near future.) The only other recourse for legalization proponents is to go around the backdoor by having states ease their laws.
The state doesn't have to enforce, but they CAN NOT prohibit or block federal employees from enforcement of federal law. And that is what the difference is here, those states are saying that they will prohibit, block federal employees from doing their job. A BIG difference.
I'd love to have an actual lawyer familiar in such things address this question further. Gryph, know anyone? Perhaps Wickersham?
The states have the power to send elected representatives to the House of Representatives and the Senate to effect Federal laws and regulation for the good of the Union. It's call a Democracy. You vote. You petition yours elected representatives. You don't like the pot laws, get enough like minded individuals to vote to change them. We chose to be united a long time ago. A do over is at this time, not a option. Put down the bong, bang the gong.
Deleteto 11:45
Deletewhat did you just say, really? did it answer my original question re: states rights vs. federal law?
my point was this: if Feds can enforce Fed law at the expense of State law, then it must be evenly applied on all issues, whether they be gun control or weed freedom. You can't hate the Feds for over-ruling one, while cheering for them to over-rule the other.
So, I am fighting to change Fed law re: the right of sick people to use pot as a medicine. I have no dog in the gunfight taking place in Kansas, but am interested in the issue.
"put down the bong, bang the gong" makes you, 11:45, sound a bit like a gun nut.
i've been waiting for this to get pointed out/highlighted to the domestic taliban teabaggin' fuk_tards
ReplyDelete10:09
ReplyDeleteWasn't this same thing brought forward by the guy running the Alaska House - the fat one from Kenai/Soldotna?
..........................................................
suk it mike chenault
The 2nd Amendment was included because before, during, and after the revolution, the colonies and the new government did not have a standing army. In case of, and during war, the Congress had to appropriate monies to pay for soldiers. The colonies and the new government did not owns armories stocked with weapons to fight wars. The founders wanted individual citizens to have a musket of their own so they could be recruited into paid militias to fight threats from other nation's that threatened the colonies or the new nation. Taxes were not popular and paying for an army was very costly. There was no military budget. Funds were made available as conflicts progressed.
DeleteThe founders had no thought of guaranteeing the possession of military weapons for potential seditionist to their own government.
The NRA and gun rights crazies today would have been hanged for sedition back in the founding day's for their anti patriot rants. Period.
Well, now they are also trying to make 'Obamacare' criminal in one of those deep red states... :/
ReplyDeleteFinally Eric Holder takes a stand. This Attorney General had been so passive that you need to hold a mirror under his nose to see if he's alive. That's why the dumb fuck states pull this crap.They know basically Holder does nothing. This pushback is LONG overdo.
ReplyDeleteEric Holder is a great guy and well experienced in the law. I suspect there are obvious reasons for him to pick and chose carefully in what he goes after nationally.
DeleteI'm so glad that President Obama has kept him for his second term. Good choice!
Read a good tweet
ReplyDeleteYou can buy an assault rifle at Walmart, but the store bans records that have curse words in the lyrics.
FUCK YEAH ... IT IS MURICA ... GO USA!
Arizona 3-year-old fatally shoots himself in face with meth grandma’s gun
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/03/arizona-3-year-old-fatally-shoots-himself-in-face-with-meth-grandmas-gun/
How many deaths will it take?
DeleteI was hesitant to click that link, but wow a 35 year old grandmother?!
Alaskan Big Guns is coming up later this hour (live streaming) at http://home.nra.org/
ReplyDeleteThe ones fighting universal healthcare, same sex marriage and gun laws are exactly the kind of vile, ugly Americans that fought the civil rights movement.
ReplyDeleteThey are the reason why the National Guard needs to be called in for to protect Americans participating in their god given rights, like going to school, to their doctor, or the church on time.
Don't tell me they are more patriotic, American, god-fearing or exceptional than regular old me, we know exactly who they are when they say they want their country back, or that they don't like where it is going.
I'd say go live in a bunker, you paranoid freaks, but then you would storm a school bus and kidnap an autistic child and make it all our problem.
Eat, Drink, and be Merry for tomorrow you may be in Kansas.
ReplyDeleteRJ in Brownbackistan
Go Eric!
ReplyDeleteWhere's the muse on the dead lake's outrage screed? She's slipping
just wait
Deleteshe's speechifying at the mo
she'll get to it, after the hub-bub has passed. just like the religious scopes; she waited until we'd forgotten all about it, and then, zam! she's on it like chiggers on a lip-sticked pig.
Thanks. Great article. I really enjoyed it. I like it when Holder gets tough.
ReplyDelete