TAC Daily Digest

George Mason vs the Constitution: Top Anti-Federalist Arguments

Michael Boldin — Fri, 26 Jul 2024 20:37:37 +0000

“A monarchy, or a corrupt tyrannical aristocracy” is what George Mason predicted we’d get. On this episode, learn about his top anti-federalist objections to the Constitution during the ratification debates. This included necessary and proper, standing armies, congress, the president – and more.

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: July 26, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Madison’s Notes – Philadelphia Convention (31 Aug 1787)

Pauline Maier – The First Dissenters

George Mason – Letter to George Washington (7 Oct 1787)

George Mason – Letter to Thomas Jefferson (26 May 1788)

George Mason’s Objections to the Constitution (22 Nov 1787)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post George Mason vs the Constitution: Top Anti-Federalist Arguments first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: New Hampshire Law Bans Warrantless AI Facial Recognition Surveillance

Mike Maharrey — Fri, 26 Jul 2024 19:25:24 +0000

CONCORD, N.H. (July 26, 2024) – Earlier this month, New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu signed a bill into law that effectively bans warrantless police surveillance using facial recognition in the state. The law went into effect retroactively on July 1.

Rep. Thomas Cormen along with a bipartisan coalition of 10 legislators introduced House Bill 1688 (HB1688) on Jan 3. Provisions in the new law prohibit “AI used with real-time and remote biometric identification systems used for surveillance in public spaces.” This includes facial recognition systems. The law expressly bans AI biometric surveillance by law enforcement without a warrant.

In effect, the enactment of HB1688 prohibits law enforcement agencies from using virtually any facial recognition systems for surveillance in public spaces without a warrant.

AI is an important aspect of all current facial recognition systems. ReFaces is a biometrics company that sells facial recognition systems. According to its website, “the majority of modern facial recognition algorithms have some semblance of integrated deep learning and neural network.” [Emphasis added]

“Intelligent, AI-based software can instantaneously search databases of faces and compare them to one or multiple faces that are detected in a scene. In an instant, you can get highly accurate results.”

The House passed HB1688 on a voice vote. The Senate concurred, also on a voice vote. With Gov. Sununu’s signature on July 12, the law went into effect retroactively on July 1.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

A 2019 report revealed that the federal government has turned state driver’s license photos into a giant facial recognition database, putting virtually every driver in America in a perpetual electronic police lineup. The revelations generated widespread outrage, but the story wasn’t new. The federal government has been developing a massive facial recognition system for years.

The FBI rolled out a nationwide facial recognition program in the fall of 2014, with the goal of building a giant biometric database with pictures provided by the states and corporate friends.

In 2016, the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law released “The Perpetual Lineup,” a massive report on law enforcement use of facial recognition technology in the U.S. You can read the complete report at perpetuallineup.org. The organization conducted a year-long investigation and collected more than 15,000 pages of documents through more than 100 public records requests. The report paints a disturbing picture of intense cooperation between the federal government, and state and local law enforcement to develop a massive facial recognition database.

“Face recognition is a powerful technology that requires strict oversight. But those controls, by and large, don’t exist today,” report co-author Clare Garvie said. “With only a few exceptions, there are no laws governing police use of the technology, no standards ensuring its accuracy, and no systems checking for bias. It’s a wild west.”

Despite the outrage generated by these reports, Congress has done nothing to roll back this facial recognition program.

There are many technical and legal problems with facial recognition, including significant concerns about the accuracy of the technology, particularly when reading the facial features of minority populations. During a test run by the ACLU of Northern California, facial recognition misidentified 26 members of the California legislature as people in a database of arrest photos.

With facial recognition technology, police and other government officials can track individuals in real-time. These systems allow law enforcement agents to use video cameras and continually scan everybody who walks by. According to the report, several major police departments have expressed an interest in this type of real-time tracking. Documents revealed agencies in at least five major cities, including Los Angeles, either claimed to run real-time face recognition off of street cameras, bought technology with the capability, or expressed written interest in buying it.

In all likelihood, the federal government heavily involves itself in helping state and local agencies obtain this technology. The feds provide grant money to local law enforcement agencies for a vast array of surveillance gear, including ALPRs, stingray devices, and drones. The federal government essentially encourages and funds a giant nationwide surveillance net and then taps into the information via fusion centers and the Information Sharing Environment (ISE).

Fusion centers were sold as a tool to combat terrorism, but that is not how they are being used. The ACLU pointed to a bipartisan congressional report to demonstrate the true nature of government fusion centers: “They haven’t contributed anything meaningful to counterterrorism efforts. Instead, they have largely served as police surveillance and information sharing nodes for law enforcement efforts targeting the frequent subjects of police attention: Black and brown people, immigrants, dissidents, and the poor.”

Fusion centers operate within the broader ISE. According to its website, the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators…have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant. Known ISE partners include the Office of Director of National Intelligence which oversees 17 federal agencies and organizations, including the NSA. ISE utilizes these partnerships to collect and share data on the millions of unwitting people they track.

Reports that the Berkeley Police Department in cooperation with a federal fusion center deployed cameras equipped to surveil a “free speech” rally and Antifa counterprotests provided the first solid link between the federal government and local authorities in facial recognition surveillance.

In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. The passage of state laws and local ordinances banning and limiting facial recognition eliminates one avenue for gathering facial recognition data. Simply put, data that doesn’t exist cannot be entered into federal databases.

The post Now in Effect: New Hampshire Law Bans Warrantless AI Facial Recognition Surveillance first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Signed as Law: New Hampshire Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearm Purchases

Mike Maharrey — Thu, 25 Jul 2024 16:15:10 +0000

CONCORD, N.H. (July 25, 2024) – Earlier this month, New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu signed the Firearm Purchaser’s Privacy Act into law. The statute prohibits financial institutions operating in the state from using a credit card merchant code that would enable the tracking of purchases for firearms, firearms accessories and ammunition.

Rep. Jason Janvrin and six cosponsors introduced House Bill 1186 (HB1186) on Nov. 27. The new law prohibits a payment card network from requiring any New Hampshire merchant to use a “firearms code” defined as “the merchant category code 5723, approved in September 2022 by the International Organization for Standardization, for firearms retailers.”

The law also bars retailers from using such a code voluntarily.

“For the purposes of the sale of firearms, ammunition for use in firearms, and firearms accessories, a firearms retailer may not provide a firearms code to a payment card issuer or payment card network and may only use or be assigned a merchant category code for general merchandise retailers or sporting goods retailers.”

The legislation includes provisions empowering the state attorney general to enforce the law and impose civil penalties for violations.

The House passed the bill by a vote of 203-174. The Senate approved the measure with a technical amendment to further define “firearms code” by a 14-10 vote. Chris Sununu signed the bill into law on July 12, and it will go into effect Jan. 1, 2025.

Over the 2023-2024 legislative sessions, at least 15 states have passed similar legislation.

PAUSED

In response to legislation like HB1186, the major credit card payment networks have “paused” implementation of the firearms merchant code. In an email to Reuters, a Mastercard representative said such bills would cause “inconsistency” in how the code could be applied by merchants, banks, and payment networks.

In September 2022, the International Standards Organization, based in Switzerland, approved a new merchant category code for firearm and ammunition merchants. In the letter to payment card networks, federal lawmakers stated that the new Merchant Category Code for firearms retailers would be “. . .the first step towards facilitating the collection of valuable financial data that could help law enforcement in countering the financing of terrorism efforts,” expressing a clear government expectation that networks will utilize the new Merchant Category Code to conduct mass surveillance of constitutionally protected firearms and ammunition purchases in cooperation with law enforcement.

The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Data collected from this merchant code would almost certainly end up in federal government databases.

Concern about the misuse of federal firearms databases isn’t just paranoia. The Taliban has reportedly used a firearm ownership database created by the U.S. government to track down gun owners and confiscate firearms in Afghanistan. This goes to show that even if you trust the people creating the database, it can fall into the wrong hands. In other words, the very existence of a database is a danger.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE.

In practice, local data collection using ALPRs, stingrays, drones and other spy technologies create the potential for the federal government to obtain and store information on millions of Americans including phone calls, emails, web browsing history, location history, and text messages, all with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.

In a nutshell, without state and local assistance, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. When the state limits surveillance and data collection, it means less information the feds can tap into. This represents a major blow to the surveillance state and a win for privacy.

The post Signed as Law: New Hampshire Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearm Purchases first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Is the President a King in Disguise? The Anti-Federalist Argument

Michael Boldin — Wed, 24 Jul 2024 19:16:35 +0000

During the debates over the ratification of the Constitution, Antifederalists repeatedly warned that the President would become like a king – and the worst kind of a king – an elected one.

Path to Liberty: July 24, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

The Executive Branch–The Federalist/Antifederalist Debates

George Mason – Plan for the Virginia Constitution (8-10 June 1776)

SINGLE EXECUTIVE

Virginia Constitution (29 June 1776)

Pennsylvania Constitution (28 Sept 1776)

Madison’s Notes – Philadelphia Convention (4 June 1787)

George Mason’s Objections to the Constitution (22 Nov 1787)

BLENDED WITH OTHER BRANCHES

Montesquieu – The Spirit of the Laws (1748)

Mercy Otis Warren – Observations on the New Constitution (1788)

Dissent of the Minority of the Pennsylvania Convention (18 Dec 1787)

Centinel II (24 Oct 1787)

Impartial Examiner IV (11 June 1788)

LOADS OF POWER

Cato IV (8 Nov 1787)

Brutus I (18 Oct 1787)

An Old Whig V (1 Nov 1787)

MONARCH

Luther Martin – Genuine Information IX (29 Jan 1788)

Philadelphiensis IX (6 Feb 1788)

Philadelphiensis X (20 Feb 1788)

Tamony – Virginia Independent Chronicle (9 Jan 1788)

PATRICK HENRY

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (5 June 1788)

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (12 June 1788)

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (13 June 1788)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Is the President a King in Disguise? The Anti-Federalist Argument first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

The “Evils of Paper Money” Have No End: The Founders Warned us Why

Michael Boldin — Mon, 22 Jul 2024 19:50:11 +0000

The Founding Fathers were deeply worried about the dangers of paper money, because they lived them first hand. On this episode, learn 4 key ways the founders warned us about the dangers of paper money – dangers we’re still living through today!

Path to Liberty: July 22, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to Edward Carrington (27 May 1788)

Thomas Paine – Dissertations on Government: The Affairs of the Bank, and Paper Money

Benjamin Rush – Letter to John Adams (23 June 1781)

Richard Henry Lee – Letter to George Mason (15 May 1787)

CAUSE OF PRICE INFLATION

Benjamin Franklin – Of the Paper Money of America (1780)

Samuel Adams – Letter to John Winthrop (6 Feb 1779)

Gouverneur Morris – Letter to George Washington (11 Jan 1796)

William Fleming – Letter to Thomas Jefferson (22 May 1779)

Thomas Jefferson – Additional Queries, with Jefferson’s Answers (Jan-Feb 1786)

EMPOWERS GOVERNMENT

Thomas Paine – Letter to George Washington

Charles Carroll – Letter to Benjamin Franklin (12 Aug 1777)

HIDDEN TAX

George Washington – Letter to Gouverneur Morris (26 Oct 1778)

FACILITATES EVERY SPECIES OF FRAUD AND INJUSTICE

Thomas Jefferson – Plan for Reducing the Circulating Medium (23 Nov 1819)

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to Albert Gallatin (26 Dec 1820)

George Washington – Letter to Jabez Bowen (9 Jan 1787)

John Adams – Letter to Thomas Jefferson (24 Feb 1819)

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to John Adams (21 Mar 1819)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post The “Evils of Paper Money” Have No End: The Founders Warned us Why first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Supreme Court Just Helped out the Real Colorado

Rob Natelson — Mon, 22 Jul 2024 18:32:44 +0000

Here is something you might not realize if you never venture outside the Denver-Boulder metroplex or if you are part of the state’s benighted “progressive” ruling class: Colorado is not Massachusetts or New York.

Most of the state is economically and culturally part of the American West. Traditionally, that’s the Real Colorado.

People in the Real Colorado, like people in Montana, Idaho, Utah, and other Western states, largely live off the land. Farming, ranching, mining, hydrocarbons, and tourism are central to the economy. Those who live in the Real Colorado, like those in other Western states, share the individualism and traditional values the “progressive” crowd would delight to destroy.

Folks in the Real Colorado don’t get many breaks these days, but the US Supreme Court just gave them one.

It was the decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which pulled the plug on the infamous “Chevron Doctrine.”

The Chevron Doctrine

The Chevron Doctrine was one of the fig leaves that 20^th century liberal activist Supreme Court majorities used to pretend the federal administrative state is somehow constitutional. Here’s the background:

The Constitution grants Congress power “to regulate Commerce … among the several States.” By “Commerce” the Constitution means mercantile trade and a few associated activities. Other economic activities, particularly those involving land within state boundaries, are not “Commerce” as the Constitution uses that word. Regulating such matters was reserved almost exclusively to the states—that is, to governments closer to the people than the distant Washington, D.C. establishment.

During the years 1787 to 1790, Americans debated whether the Constitution should be ratified. The document’s advocates emphasized repeatedly that the proposed Constitution limited the economic power of the federal government. Only the states could regulate in-state land transactions, agriculture, mining, and other forms of land use. These representations were confirmed by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

Beginning around 1940, however, liberal Supreme Court majorities stopped enforcing those limitations on federal power. The court pretended that “Commerce . . . among the several States” meant “the entire economy.”

The result was a bonanza for federal politicians. They reveled in their new-found power and passed laws on almost every conceivable subject. Eventually, even your personal toilet became subject to federal regulation.

But the politicians who so enjoyed inflicting laws on the rest of us couldn’t be bothered monitoring those laws. So they passed statutes creating administrative agencies and granting those agencies vast powers.

Yet even those vast powers were limited. When agencies attacked Western land owners and land users, the victimized citizens sometimes went to court to argue that the agency was exceeding its statutory authority.

Well, we can’t have that! So in 1984, yet another liberal Supreme Court majority issued what became known as the “Chevron Doctrine.” It said that in most cases, an agency is the judge of its own authority. If there was any basis for the agency’s conclusion—even if the conclusion was wrong—the judicial branch would abdicate and let the agency rule in its own favor.

Agency abuse

What followed was, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, a “long train of abuses.” Federal agencies invaded the jurisdiction of the states to assault Western property owners.

A good example was on the Supreme Court docket last year: Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In that case, an Idaho couple (the Sacketts) had decided to backfill their land, but the EPA ordered them to reverse the process.

As a constitutional matter, this land use issue should have been one for Idaho state officials—not for the federal government. But the EPA claimed jurisdiction as part of its authority over “navigable waters.”

There was no water—navigable or otherwise—on the Sacketts’ land. But that didn’t bother the federal bureaucrats. The EPA argued that—

The Sacketts’ lot lay beside a 30-foot-wide road;
on the other side of the road was a non-navigable water ditch;
the ditch flowed into a non-navigable creek;
the non-navigable creek flowed into Priest Lake;
although Priest Lake is located wholly within the State of Idaho and is not a trade route, tourists sometimes used it; so
the EPA had designated the lake as “navigable,” and therefore
the EPA had jurisdiction over the backfilling of a lot 30 feet away from a non-navigable ditch entering into a non-navigable stream entering into an isolated lake that was “navigable” because the EPA had declared it so.

All of this might sound like a joke. But the EPA’s threat to fine the Sacketts up to $40,000 per day certainly was no joke.

What the Supreme Court just did

Last year’s case of Sackett v. EPA has a happy ending. The Supreme Court unanimously told the feds to back off.

But farmers, ranchers, and other land owners still could fear the feds would come for them next. At any time, land owners might be subjected to obliterating financial penalties for draining a mudhole or being insufficiently kind to some federally-favored species.

In the Loper Bright case, the Supreme Court reduced the threat. By discarding the Chevron Doctrine, the court assured that when the Deep State attacks a citizen, the citizen will have more of a fighting chance.

At least if it looks like the agency exceeded its legal authority, that question now will be tried by a court—not by the agency itself.

This article first appeared in Complete Colorado on July 4, 2024.

The post Supreme Court Just Helped out the Real Colorado first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

A Single Step: The Weapon They Use to Destroy Liberty

Michael Boldin — Sun, 21 Jul 2024 18:36:52 +0000

A single step beyond the limits of the constitution – is a step too far.

Thomas Jefferson – in his 1791 opinion on the constitutionality of the national bank put it like this:

“To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.”

Jefferson understood the danger of precedent. Once you allow government any reason to go beyond its limits – it will keep doing the same again and again.

And again.

Yes, and again.

It’ll never stop.

This was a widely understood principle for the founders and old revolutionaries

John Dickinson, the “Penman of the American Revolution,” put it this way in his broadside urging noncompliance with the Stamp Act of 1765

“IF you comply with the Act by using Stamped Papers, you fix, you rivet perpetual Chains upon your unhappy Country. You unnecessarily, voluntarily establish the detestable Precedent, which those who have forged your Fetters ardently wish for, to varnish the future Exercise of this new claimed Authority”

Dickinson repeated this warning about precedent in his 1767 Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania – the most widely-read documents on American liberty up until publication of Thomas Paine’s common sense in 1776.

Quoting Dickinson, Samuel Adams emphasized this view:

“When an act injurious to freedom has been once done, and the people bear it, the repetition of it is most likely to meet with submission.”

Unfortunately today, a lot of people seem to be ok with usurpations of power – steps beyond the limits of the Constitution – as long as it’s done by their team or if they like the policy.

But this short-term thinking is like disarming yourself and then handing a loaded weapon to your opposition.

George Washington understood this well, and warned against it in his farewell address.

“let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.”

James Otis Jr may have summed it up best:

“It is of the utmost consequence that we boldly oppose the least infraction of our charter and rights.”

The post A Single Step: The Weapon They Use to Destroy Liberty first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Myth Busted! Virginia, Not Congress, Called for the Philadelphia Convention

Michael Boldin — Fri, 19 Jul 2024 19:37:24 +0000

Most people seem to believe that the constitutional convention of 1787 was called for by Congress under the Articles of Confederation. Even the Library of Congress makes this claim. But it’s totally false. It was actually the Commonwealth of Virginia that initiated the call for the Philadelphia convention – and she was followed by a number of other states before congress ever shared their opinion in early 1787. Learn the truth – receipts included.

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: July 19, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Library of Virginia

Library of Congress – May 1787 the Beginning of the Constitutional Convention

Alexander Hamilton – Annapolis Convention Resolution (14 Sept 1786)

Natelson – Who Called the Constitutional Convention? The Commonwealth of Virginia

Virginia Act For Appointing Deputies To The 1787 Philadelphia Convention (23 Nov 1786)

New Jersey – Resolution Authorizing and Empowering the Delegates (24 Nov 1786)

Wiki: Constitution of the United States

Confederation Congress – Resolution in Support of Convention (21 Feb 1787)

Edmund Randolph – Philadelphia Convention (29 May 1787)

Hugh H. Brackenridge – Pittsburgh Gazette (27 Oct 1787)

Declaration of Independence

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Myth Busted! Virginia, Not Congress, Called for the Philadelphia Convention first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Forgotten Founder Tench Coxe: Ignored Federalist Papers

Michael Boldin — Wed, 17 Jul 2024 19:26:37 +0000

Almost totally ignored today, Tench Coxe was famous at the time of the Founding. And his essays of “A Pennsylvanian” in support of the Constitution were actually far more widely read and influential during the debates over ratification than today’s far more famous Federalist Papers. Learn about his essays where he came down in favor of the individual right to keep and bear arms, religious liberty – and a clear line in the sand between federal and state power.

Path to Liberty: July 17, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Maharrey – Beyond the Text: Understanding the Constitution’s Original Meaning

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to William Johnson (12 June 1823)

James Madison – Letter to Henry Lee (25 June 1824)

Natelson – More evidence the feds are exceeding their powers

Maharrey – How Tench Coxe Shaped the Ratification Debates: Essays of A Pennsylvanian

Natelson – More News on Powers Reserved Exclusively to the States

Cooke – Tench Coxe and the Early Republic

The Address and reasons of dissent of the minority of the convention, of the state of Pennsylvania, to their constituents

Natelson – More evidence the feds are exceeding their powers

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Forgotten Founder Tench Coxe: Ignored Federalist Papers first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

The National Debt in Perspective

Mike Maharrey — Tue, 16 Jul 2024 18:16:32 +0000

U.S. government borrowing and spending never stops.

The federal government ran another big deficit in June, as the national debt inches closer to $35 trillion.

$35 trillion.

Trillion with a ‘T.’

That’s an unfathomable number. It’s meaningless to most people. We simply can’t comprehend a number that big.

Let’s try to put the $34.9 trillion national debt into perspective.

According to the National Debt Clock, every American citizen would have to write a check for $103,565 to pay off the national debt.

Of course, a lot of people don’t pay taxes. That means the taxpayer burden is much higher. Every U.S. taxpayer would have to write a check for $266,953 to wipe out the debt. And that’s on top of the taxes we already pay!

To put it another way, $35 trillion is more than the total economies of China, Japan, Germany, and the UK combined.

VISUALIZING 1 TRILLION

1,000,000,000,000

It’s hard to wrap your head around how big 1 trillion is, much less 35 trillion. Here are a few factoids to help you visualize just how big that number is:

There are 1 million seconds in 11.5 days. A trillion seconds is about 32,000 years.
If you could say one number every second, it would take about 11.5 million years to count to 1 trillion.
If you had spent $1 million every day since the birth of Christ, you still wouldn’t have spent $1 trillion.
If you line up dollar bills end-to-end, you could go to the moon and back around 203 times with $1 trillion. You could wrap them around the earth about 3,893 times.
If you stacked up 1 trillion dollar bills, the dollar tower would rise to 67,866 miles.
If a cup of coffee costs $3, you could buy 333 billion cups of coffee with $1 trillion.
If you had 1 trillion dollars, you could give every person on Earth approximately $125.
One trillion grains of rice would weigh about 20,000 metric tons.

Keep in mind that all of these examples only illustrate the size of $1 trillion. The national debt is nearly 35 times that number.

James Madison once called a large national debt a “public curse.”

“I go on the principle that a Public Debt is a Public curse and in a Rep. Govt. a greater than in any other.”

We’re certainly cursed to the tune of $35 trillion.

Thomas Jefferson said he considered “public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared.”

In his Farewell Address, George Washington urged us to use debt sparingly – and, get this, actually pay it off as quickly as possible!

“As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it.”

We failed to heed the warning of the Anti-federalist writer Brutus.

“I can scarcely contemplate a greater calamity that could befall this country, than to be loaded with a debt exceeding their ability ever to discharge. If this be a just remark, it is unwise and improvident to vest in the general government a power to borrow at discretion, without any limitation or restriction.”

And here we are.

This a was originally published at MoneyMetals.com

The post The National Debt in Perspective first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Cause and Solution: The Founders on Political Violence

Alan Mosley — Mon, 15 Jul 2024 19:21:53 +0000

“A frightful despotism” – that’s what George Washington predicted we’d get with a combo of factions and usurpation of power. But he was far from alone in warning against what leads to political violence. Ignoring their warnings – and solution – only guarantees the worst has yet to begin.

Path to Liberty: July 15, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Benjamin Franklin – Philadelphia Convention (2 June 1787)

Mercy Otis Warren – History of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution/Chapter XXXI

John Adams – Letter to Jonathan Jackson (2 Oct 1780)

Thomas Gordon – The Works of Sallust (1744)

Thomas Paine – Dissertation on the First Principles of Government

Thomas Paine – The Rights of Man, Part II (1792)

George Washington – Farewell Address (19 Sept 1796)

Cato III (25 Oct 1787)

Samuel Adams – Letter to Elbridge Gerry (22 Aug 1789)

James Madison – Virginia Ratifying Convention (6 June 1788)

Noah Webster – The Revolution in France (1794)

Episode: Constitution Enforcement Mechanism

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Cause and Solution: The Founders on Political Violence first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Kentucky Law Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 15 Jul 2024 08:29:14 +0000

FRANKFORT, Ky. (July 15, 2024) – Today, a Kentucky law that bans the use of a credit card merchant code that enables the tracking of firearm and ammunition purchases went into effect.

Rep. Derek Lewis and three cosponsors introduced House Bill 357 (HB357). Titled the Second Amendment Privacy Act, the law prohibits financial institutions from requiring or incentivizing a merchant category code that distinguishes a firearms retailer from other retailers. It also bars financial institutions or credit card processors from independently assigning the same.

The new law also prohibits any government agency from “knowingly and willfully keeping or causing to be kept any list, record, or registry of privately owned firearms or any list, record, or registry of the owners of the firearms, except for those records kept during the regular course of a criminal investigation and prosecution or as otherwise required by law.”

The State Attorney General has the authority to enforce the provisions.

The House passed HB357 by a 78-18 vote. The Senate concurred with a vote of 31-7. Gov. Andy Beshear took no action on the bill and it became law without his signature. It went into effect July 15.

IN EFFECT

In response to legislation like this, major credit card payment networks “paused” implementation of the firearms merchant code. In an email to Reuters, a Mastercard representative said such bills would cause “inconsistency” in how the code could be applied by merchants, banks and payment networks.

The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Data collected from this merchant code would almost certainly end up in federal government databases.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE.

In practice, local data collection using ALPRs, stingrays, drones and other spy technologies creates the potential for the federal government to obtain and store information on millions of Americans including phone calls, emails, web browsing history, location history, and text messages, all with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.

The post Now in Effect: Kentucky Law Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

History Ignored: The Northwest Ordinance of 1787

Michael Boldin — Fri, 12 Jul 2024 21:29:38 +0000

One of the most important foundational documents in American history, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 is one that most people never learn about. Following principles outlined by Thomas Jefferson in 1784, it included a precursor to the bill of rights four years before one was added to the Constitution, it banned slavery in the territories decades before the same language was copied into the 13th Amendment, and led to the creation of the states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: July 12, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Ronald Reagan – Proclamation 5676 — Northwest Ordinance Bicentennial Day, 1987

Maharrey – Northwest Ordinance: Landmark 1787 Law Set the Foundation

MAP – Northwest Ordinance

Report of the Committee (1 Mar 1784)

Jefferson’s Observations on DéMeunier’s Manuscript (22 June 1786)

Northwest Ordinance – Full Text

13th Amendment

Center for the Study of the American Constitution

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post History Ignored: The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Big Wins for Liberty: State Laws Push Back vs Feds (CBDC, 2A Privacy, More)

Michael Boldin — Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:45:15 +0000

Despite all the bad things happening all around us – there actually is some GOOD news to report! New state laws going into effect this summer push back on centralized power by rejecting a CBDC, prohibiting a new scheme to track firearm purchases, support sound money, raw milk – and more. Don’t miss this update on the latest news from the Nullification Movement!

Path to Liberty: July 10, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

CBDC

Episode – James Madison vs a Central Bank Digital Currency

RAW MILK

West Virginia

Delaware

SOUND MONEY

New Jersey

New Jersey Legislature Glossary of Terms – Pocket Veto

FIREARM PRIVACY

Samuel Adams – Candidus, Boston Gazette (14 OCt 1771)

State of the Nullification Movement Report

Episode – Constitution 101: Enforcement Mechanism

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Big Wins for Liberty: State Laws Push Back vs Feds (CBDC, 2A Privacy, More) first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Every Unconstitutional Act Is Void!

Mike Maharrey — Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:58:41 +0000

The Constitution is supreme, not any old law Congress decides to pass.

In fact, anything the federal government does beyond the delegated powers in the Constitution is VOID.

And it’s void from the moment it’s enacted.

Stealing Power: Unconstitutional Laws are VOID

Federal laws that go beyond the Constitution aren’t actually laws at all. They’re VOID – and are what the founders called usurpations, or a theft of power.@mmaharrey10th pic.twitter.com/jgQ4Gavjcr

— TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) June 14, 2024

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Acts Against the Constitution are Void

The Supremacy Clause

The Founders’ Word: Void

The post Every Unconstitutional Act Is Void! first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Correcting Biden’s False Statement on the Supreme Court’s Presidential Immunity Decision

Rob Natelson — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 22:05:35 +0000

Don’t be misled by President Biden’s statement on the Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity.

As reported in The Hill, Biden stated: “For all practical purposes, today’s decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle . . . It’s a dangerous precedent, because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law, even including the Supreme Court of the United States.”

These comments are provably false. Here are the facts:

Even before this decision, most experts believed the President could not be prosecuted criminally while in office.
However, while in office, he is remains liable to impeachment and removal for any “high Crimes and Misdemeanors,” whether official or unofficial, including his “core” exclusive duties. Some scholars believe that a President can be impeached even after leaving office.
After a President leaves office, he is potentially criminally-liable for all unofficial acts.
After a President leaves office there is a presumption of immunity for official duties outside “core” areas, but potentially the presumption can be rebutted by showing that criminal prosecution would not impair the duties of the presidency. If the presumption is rebutted, he can be liable criminally.

This Supreme Court decision was well within the scope of what was expected. It was made necessary by Biden himself—specifically, the unprecedented scale of his weaponization of the legal system against a political opponent.

The post Correcting Biden’s False Statement on the Supreme Court’s Presidential Immunity Decision first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Forgotten Declaration: Cause of the War for Independence Explained

Michael Boldin — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 20:44:15 +0000

The American Revolution: What REALLY sparked the fight? This episode explores an almost totally forgotten declaration written by Thomas Jefferson and John Dickinson in 1775. The Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms is an incredibly important document revealing the colonists’ motivations beyond what history books tell you.

Path to Liberty: July 8, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

It Was Gun Control: What Started the War for Independence

No Deal for Gun Control: How the American Revolutionaries Defied the Empire

Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (6 July 1775)

Episode – The Revolution vs Unlimited, Centralized Power

The Forgotten Declaration that Explained the War for Independence

Proclamation by Gov Gage (12 June 1775)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Forgotten Declaration: Cause of the War for Independence Explained first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

The Bill of Rights Isn’t a Permission Slip

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 18:58:36 +0000

The Bill of Rights doesn’t give you rights. In fact, if you need government permission, it’s not really a right.

You had your rights from the moment you were born. The Bill of Rights just restricts government actions that would infringe on them.

The Bill of Rights Doesn't GIVE You Rights!

Referring to your natural rights by an amendment number implies you got them from a document. Thomas Paine said claiming that any charter GIVES you rights is “a perversion of terms.”@mmaharrey10th pic.twitter.com/jPSN0QgOFa

— TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) June 20, 2024

FOR MORE INFORMATION

The Bill of Rights Has a Preamble: Even if the Senate and the Heritage Foundation Omit It

Natural Rights: Liberty Doesn’t Need a Government Permission Slip

What Are Rights? This Is What the Founders Believed

Natural Rights and Liberty: The Foundation and the Goal

The post The Bill of Rights Isn’t a Permission Slip first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Property Rights: The Foundation of Liberty

Mike Maharrey — Sun, 07 Jul 2024 18:58:33 +0000

But this isn’t just about your right to own physical things.

Property rights are ultimately about self-ownership. Our most valuable property is in ourselves – our bodies, our thoughts, our opinions, our labor, and our peaceful actions.

“The right of property is the guardian of every other right.”

But property rights aren’t just about owning stuff – it’s about self-ownership.@mmaharrey10th pic.twitter.com/GA0QKHTiiD

— TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) June 25, 2024

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Property Rights Are the Foundation of All the Rest

James Madison – Property (29 Mar 1792)

The Founders and Property Rights

The post Property Rights: The Foundation of Liberty first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

The Real American Revolution Was Before the War

Mike Maharrey — Sat, 06 Jul 2024 18:53:27 +0000

The war wasn’t the American Revolution. The real revolution was in the hearts and minds of the people long before the first shot was fired.

The REAL American Revolution was YEARS before the War and the Declaration of Independence

”This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.” pic.twitter.com/eVGCMOh1En

— TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) July 2, 2024

FOR MORE INFORMATION

The Top Five Principles from the American Revolution

The Real Revolution: James Otis vs the Writs of Assistance

Otis, Adams, Dickinson: The Massachusetts Circular Letter

The post The Real American Revolution Was Before the War first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

National Debt: We Are Cursed!

Mike Maharrey — Fri, 05 Jul 2024 18:47:20 +0000

The national debt is a national curse. That’s how James Madison described it.

And we are certainly cursed – to the tune of $34.5 trillion and growing. We should have listened to the founders’ warnings.

@tenthamendmentcenter The National Debt is a National Curse: The Founders Warned Us #constitution #history #10thAmendment #liberty #libertarian #founders #historytok #quoteoftheday ♬ original sound – TenthAmendmentCenter

FOR MORE INFORMATION

The National Debt Is a National Curse

This Is Already an Economic Crisis

Taxes Are the Price We Pay…

The post National Debt: We Are Cursed! first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Georgia Law Takes Step Against a Potential CBDC

Mike Maharrey — Fri, 05 Jul 2024 18:43:36 +0000

ATLANTA, Ga. (July 5, 2024) – On Monday, a Georgia law went into effect that will take a small step toward limiting the impact of any potential future central bank digital currency (CBDC) in the state.

Rep. Carter Barrett and five cosponsors introduced House Bill 1053 (HB1053) on Jan. 26. The new law prohibits a state governmental agency from accepting a payment using central bank digital currency. It also bars all state governmental agencies from participating in any test of central bank digital currency.

The legislative findings in HB1053 state, “A CBDC would be an unacceptable expansion of federal authority by giving the federal government unprecedented control of the lives, freedoms, choices, and sovereignty of the people of Georgia.”

The Senate passed HB1053 by a 38-11 vote. The House approved the measure 136-32. With Gov. Brian Kemp’s signature, the law went into effect on July 1.

HB1053 is similar to a law passed in Alabama in 2023 and in Indiana and South Dakota in 2024.

IN PRACTICE

In the spirit of James Madison’s blueprint in Federalist #46, the enactment of HB1053 would create “impediments” to the implementation of a CBDC in Georgia. Madison said “a refusal to cooperate with officers of the union” along with “the embarrassments created by legislative devices,” would “oppose, in any State, difficulties not to be despised.”

Other states have also taken steps to block the use of CBDCs. Indiana, Florida, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah have enacted laws that ban the use of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) as money in the state.

How such legislation will play out in practice against a CBDC, should the federal government attempt to implement one, is unknown.

Opponents of the legislation generally take the position that states can’t do anything to stop a CBDC, since – according to their view – under the supremacy clause “any federal law on this point will automatically override state law.”

We’ve heard this song and dance on other issues before.

In the ramp-up to the 1996 vote on Proposition 215 in California, voters were repeatedly told that legalization of marijuana, even for limited medical purposes, was a fruitless effort, since, under the supremacy clause, any such state law would be automatically overridden by the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA). At best, opponents told Californians, the state would end up in a costly, and losing court effort.

But despite those warnings, Californians voted yes, setting in motion the massive state-level movement we see today, where a growing majority of states have legalized what the federal government prohibits. Ultimately, the federal government will likely have to back down, even if just to save face, because it has become impossible to fully enforce its federal prohibition over this massive state and individual resistance.

A similar scenario played out in response to the REAL ID Act of 2005. The national ID system still isn’t fully up and running more than 17 years after the “final deadline” for full implementation.

Why not?

Because a significant number of states decided not to participate, drug their feet, or in some cases, simply provide residents with a choice to opt out. Federal officials have confirmed that state-level roadblocks to implementation are the primary reason for the continuing delays.

“Roadblock” is likely the way this legislation to oppose a CBDC could play out, and it’s part of James Madison’s four-step blueprint for how states can stop federal programs.

But, as can be seen so far with issues like marijuana and the REAL ID Act, whether a federal program is implemented or not ultimately gets down to the number of roadblocks put up by states, and the willingness of the people to participate, or not.

CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCIES (CBDC)

Digital currencies exist as virtual banknotes or coins held in a digital wallet on your computer or smartphone. The difference between a central bank (government) digital currency and peer-to-peer electronic cash such as bitcoin is that the value of the digital currency is backed and controlled by the government, just like traditional fiat currency.

Government-issued digital currencies are sold on the promise of providing a safe, convenient, and more secure alternative to physical cash. We’re also told it will help stop dangerous criminals who like the intractability of cash. But there is a darker side – the promise of control.

At the root of the move toward government digital currency is “the war on cash.” The elimination of cash creates the potential for the government to track and even control consumer spending.

Imagine if there was no cash. It would be impossible to hide even the smallest transaction from the government’s eyes. Something as simple as your morning trip to Starbucks wouldn’t be a secret from government officials. As Bloomberg put it in an article published when China launched a digital yuan pilot program in 2020, digital currency “offers China’s authorities a degree of control never possible with physical money.”

The government could even “turn off” an individual’s ability to make purchases. Bloomberg described just how much control a digital currency could give Chinese officials.

The PBOC has also indicated that it could put limits on the sizes of some transactions, or even require an appointment to make large ones. Some observers wonder whether payments could be linked to the emerging social-credit system, wherein citizens with exemplary behavior are ‘whitelisted’ for privileges, while those with criminal and other infractions find themselves left out. ‘China’s goal is not to make payments more convenient but to replace cash, so it can keep closer tabs on people than it already does,’ argues Aaron Brown, a crypto investor who writes for Bloomberg Opinion.”

Economist Thorsten Polleit outlined the potential for Big Brother-like government control with the advent of a digital euro in an article published by the Mises Wire. As he put it, “the path to becoming a surveillance state regime will accelerate considerably” if and when a digital currency is issued.

In 2022, the Federal Reserve released a “discussion paper” examining the pros and cons of a potential US central bank digital dollar. According to the central bank’s website, there has been no decision on implementing a digital currency, but this pilot program reveals the idea is further along than most people realized.

The post Now in Effect: Georgia Law Takes Step Against a Potential CBDC first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

To the Governor: Delaware Bill Would Legalize Limited Raw Milk Sales

Mike Maharrey — Fri, 05 Jul 2024 18:41:52 +0000

DOVER, Del. (July 5, 2024) – Last week, the Delaware House gave final approval to a bill that would legalize the sale of raw milk by producers directly to consumers in the state sending it to the governor. Under current law, all raw milk sales are illegal in the state.

Sen. Eric Buckson and a bipartisan coalition of cosponsors introduced Senate Bill 273 (SB273) on May 2. The legislation would allow producers with a valid permit to sell raw milk and raw milk products directly to consumers. The legislation includes health, safety, and labeling regulations raw milk producers must adhere to.

On June 27, the House passed SB273 by a 39-2 vote. The Senate previously approved the measure by a 14-5 vote. It now goes to Gov. John Carney’s desk for his consideration.

Passage into law would also take an important step toward further rejecting a federal prohibition scheme in practice and effect.

The bill synopsis notes that the sale of raw milk “is currently prohibited by Section 9 of the current United States Department of Health and Human Services’ Grade ‘A’ Pasteurized Milk Ordinance.

“However, consumers are increasingly demanding the opportunity to purchase raw milk in Delaware, rather than traveling to other states that permit raw milk sales. Allowing raw milk and products derived from raw milk to be sold in Delaware will respond to that demand while also providing new economic opportunities for Delaware dairy producers.”

During the 2023 legislative session, Idaho and North Dakota expanded their raw milk sales and Iowa legalized limited raw milk sales. This year, West Virginia legalized retail raw milk sales with no restrictions.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROHIBITION

FDA officials insist that unpasteurized milk poses a health risk because of its susceptibility to contamination from cow manure, a source of E. coli.

“It is the FDA’s position that raw milk should never be consumed,” agency spokeswoman Tamara N. Ward said in November 2011.

The FDA’s position represents more than a matter of opinion. In 1987, the feds implemented 21 CFR 1240.61(a), providing that, “no person shall cause to be delivered into interstate commerce or shall sell, otherwise distribute, or hold for sale or other distribution after shipment in interstate commerce any milk or milk product in final package form for direct human consumption unless the product has been pasteurized.”

Not only do the feds ban the transportation of raw milk across state lines, but they also claim the authority to ban unpasteurized milk within the borders of a state.

“It is within HHS’s authority…to institute an intrastate ban [on unpasteurized milk] as well,” FDA officials wrote in response to a Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund lawsuit against the agency over the interstate ban.

The FDA clearly wants complete prohibition of raw milk and some insiders say it’s only a matter of time before the feds try to institute an absolute ban. Armed raids by FDA agents on companies like Rawsome Foods back in 2011 and Amish farms over the last few years also indicate this scenario may not be too far off.

When states allow the sale of raw milk within their borders, it takes an important step toward nullifying this federal prohibition scheme in practice and effect.

As we’ve seen with marijuana and industrial hemp, an intrastate ban becomes ineffective when states ignore it and pass laws encouraging the prohibited activity anyway. The federal government lacks the enforcement power necessary to maintain its ban, and people will willingly take on the small risk of federal sanctions if they know the state will not interfere. This increases when the state actively encourages the market and nullifies federal prohibition in effect.

We’ve seen this demonstrated dramatically in states that have legalized industrial hemp. When they authorized production, farmers began growing industrial hemp, even in the face of a federal ban. Despite facing the possibility of federal prosecution, some growers were still willing to step into the void and begin cultivating the plant once the state removed its barriers.

In the same way, removing state barriers to raw milk consumption, sale, and production would undoubtedly spur the creation of new markets for unpasteurized dairy products, no matter what the feds claim the power to do.

It could ultimately nullify the interstate ban as well. If all 50 states allow raw milk, markets within the states could easily grow to the point that local sales would render the federal ban on interstate commerce pointless. And history indicates the feds do not have the resources to stop people from transporting raw milk across state lines – especially if multiple states start legalizing it. Growing markets will quickly overwhelm any federal enforcement attempts.

WHAT’S NEXT

Gov. Carney will have 30 days from the date SB273 is transmitted to his office to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature.

The post To the Governor: Delaware Bill Would Legalize Limited Raw Milk Sales first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Louisiana Law Legalizes Permitless Carry

Mike Maharrey — Thu, 04 Jul 2024 10:44:53 +0000

BATON ROUGE, La. (July 4, 2024) – Today, a Louisiana law allowing the permitless carrying of concealed firearms went into effect. The enactment of a so-called “constitutional carry” bill will also foster an environment more hostile to federal gun control.

Sen. Blake Miguez sponsored SB1 (SB1). The new law will allow Louisiana residents 18 and over who are not prohibited from possessing a firearm under state or federal law to carry a concealed firearm without a permit. Under the law, the state will continue issuing concealed carry permits for residents who want to carry in other states with CCDW reciprocity with Louisiana.

Louisiana already allows the open carrying of firearms without a permit by individuals 21 and over.

The Senate passed the bill in a 28-10 vote. The House passed the bill by a 76-28 margin. With Gov. Jeff Laundry’s signature in March, the law went into effect on July 4.

Currently, 29 states have legalized permitless carry.

EFFECT ON FEDERAL GUN CONTROL

While permitless carry bills do not directly affect federal gun control, the widespread passage of permitless concealed carry laws in states subtly undermines federal efforts to regulate guns. As we’ve seen with marijuana and industrial hemp, a federal regulation becomes ineffective when states ignore it and pass laws encouraging the prohibited activity anyway.

The federal government lacks the enforcement power necessary to maintain its ban, and people will willingly take on the small risk of federal sanctions if they know the state will not interfere. This increases when the state actively encourages “the market.”

Less restrictive state gun laws will likely have a similar impact on federal gun laws. It will make it that much more difficult for the feds to enforce any future federal gun control, and increase the likelihood that states with few limits will simply refuse to cooperate with federal enforcement efforts.

State actions such as passing SB1 would lower barriers for those wanting the option of defending themselves with firearms and encourage a “gun-friendly” environment that would make federal efforts to limit firearms that much more difficult.

The post Now in Effect: Louisiana Law Legalizes Permitless Carry first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Happy Insurrection Day!

Mike Maharrey — Thu, 04 Jul 2024 07:16:25 +0000

Today we celebrate insurrection.

We call July 4 “Independence Day.” But the British called it an act of rebellion.

You see, insurrection is in the eye of the beholder.

Technically, the British were right. Encyclopedia Britannica defines insurrection as “an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects.”

The idea of insurrection offends modern sensibilities, and it is certainly an extreme last resort.

But it’s not always unjustified.

Today, Americans tend to be passive when it comes to resisting government. When we get mad, we protest. When we get really mad, we try to vote the bums out (and usually end up with more bums) or sue in federal court (basically asking the government to fix the government).

But this certainly wasn’t the mindset of the founding generation. Americans in that day believed tyranny should be resisted.

Tensions between the British government and the colonists came to a head with the passage of the Stamp Act in 1765. The colonists viewed it as a Parliamentary overreach and a violation of their rights as British citizens. John Hancock encapsulated the spirit of the day.

The people of this country will never suffer themselves to be made slaves of by submission to the damned act.”

This wasn’t blind rebellion. It was rooted in the idea that government doesn’t control the people. People control the government. Mercy Otis Warren summed it up this way.

The origin of all power is in the people, and they have an incontestable right to check the creatures of their own creation.”

Under the (unwritten) British constitution, the colonists had a certain level of self-governance. They believed that only their local representatives (colonial assemblies) could levy taxes. Thus the phrase, “No taxation without representation.”

But the Americans’ grievances weren’t really about taxes. They were more fundamentally about what they perceived as a violation of their rights as British citizens under their constitution.

In a nutshell, a constitutional crisis led to the American Revolution.

The colonists realized as James Otis Jr. warned, “So long as people will submit to arbitrary measures, so long will they find masters.”

Otis went on to say nothing destroys liberty “more than a prevailing opinion that it is better to tamely submit than nobly assert and vindicate our privileges.”

Today, the prevailing opinion seems to be rooted in resignation. Americans spend more time asking government for permission than they do resisting.

Looking back, it’s pretty clear American colonists weren’t keen on asking King George or Parliament for permission. And when they got fed up with George’s taxes and Parliament constantly whittling away their rights under the British constitution, they just waved buh-bye.

At its core, the American Revolution was an assertion of the people’s most fundamental right. In the Declaration of Independence, they declared that people have the right to “alter or abolish” their form of government and establish a new one “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends.”

I’m pretty sure the likes of Samuel Adams and Thomas Jefferson would have been labeled “anti-government extremists” and de-platformed by social media had it existed in 1776.

Here’s a truth that will probably get me labeled an extremist – on July 4, we not only celebrate insurrection; we cheer on secession.

Independence Day is a secession holiday.

Sorry, Mr. Linclon.

Secession became a dirty word thanks to the Civil War and its association with slavery, but the right to alter or abolish a government and form a new one is the foundation of American political thought. It is rooted in the idea that the people are sovereign and not the government.

In the British system, the government was supreme. It made its own rules and the people were expected to submit. In the early years, the colonies enjoyed a great deal of autonomy. Colonial assemblies handled local governance. The colonists came to believe this was their constitutional right. But over time, Parliament asserted more and more control. Ultimately, even as it repealed the Stamp Act, it declared it had the right to legislate and bind the colonies in “all cases whatsoever.”

The American colonists said, “Wait a minute! Government wasn’t meant to lord over us; it was meant to serve us and work toward very limited ends.” This is why the United States has a written Constitution that starts with the words “we the people.” It sets the rules and limits for government.

The government isn’t in charge of us. We’re in charge of the government.

Or that’s how it’s supposed to work.

These days…well, look around and you decide.

Most Americans have a general familiarity with the opening paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence, but many have never taken the time to read the entire document. Thomas Jefferson used most of his ink listing grievances against the British crown. Once Jefferson established the right of the American colonies to secede from Britain and form new governments, he endeavored to justify such a move.

I find the list of grievances enlightening when placed in a modern context. Reading through the Declaration, I get the distinct impression it might be time for another revolution (although I would prefer this one be without guns – perhaps a revolution of thought). Here are just a few of the American grievances. Just replace “he” (the King of Great Britain) with Washington D.C. and you’ll get the idea.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation.

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us. (Federal agents of every variety)

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments.

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury.

Sound familiar?

And that brings us to the key sentence of the Declaration.

These United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States.”

Free and independent states.

Not vassals of Washington DC.

Not the subjects of a president.

Not under the thumb of a big centralized government in Washington D.C.

That’s exactly what the colonists fought to get rid of.

Just some food for thought as you watch your fireworks this weekend.

The post Happy Insurrection Day! first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

To the Governor: New Jersey Bill Would Repeal Sales Taxes on Gold and Silver

Mike Maharrey — Tue, 02 Jul 2024 17:45:49 +0000

TRENTON, N.J. (July 2, 2024) – Last week, the New Jersey Assembly and Senate unanimously gave final approval to a bill that would exempt gold and silver bullion from state sales and use taxes sending it to Governor Phil Murphy’s desk.

Sen. Douglas Steinhardt and a bipartisan coalition of five cosponsors introduced Senate Bill 721 (S721) on Jan. 9. Rep. Louis Greenwald sponsored the companion bill (A2812) in the Assembly. The legislation would exempt the sale of investment metal bullion (bars and coins) and investment coins from the state sales and use tax.

Investment metal bullion is defined as “any elementary precious metal that has been put through a process of smelting or refining, including, but not limited to, gold, silver, platinum, and palladium, and that is in such state or condition that its value depends upon its contents and not its form.”

“Investment coin” is defined as “any numismatic coin manufactured of gold, silver, platinum, palladium, or any other metal, including non-precious metals” with a fair market value less than $1,000.

On June 28, the Assembly passed S721 by a 73-0 vote with some technical amendments to the definitions of investment metal bullion and investment coins. The Senate concurred with the amendments by a 40-0 vote. The bill now heads to Gov. Murphy’s desk for his consideration.

Identical legislation unanimously passed both the House and Senate during the last session, but Gov. Phil Murphy refused to sign it, thus “pocket vetoing” the measure.

KNOCKING DOWN BARRIERS

Enactment of this legislation would not only relieve some of the tax burdens on investors, but it would also eliminate one barrier to using gold and silver in everyday transactions, a foundational step for people to undermine the Federal Reserve’s monopoly on money.

Currently, 45 states have eliminated sales taxes on gold and silver bullion. Repealing sales taxes on precious metal bullion takes a step toward treating gold and silver as money instead of commodities. Taxes on precious metal bullion erect barriers to using gold and silver as money by raising transaction costs. As Sound Money Defense League policy director Jp Cortez testified during a committee hearing on a similar bill in Wyoming in 2018, charging taxes on money itself is beyond the pale.

“In effect, states that collect taxes on purchases of precious metals are inherently saying gold and silver are not money at all.”

Imagine if you asked a grocery clerk to break a $5 bill and he charged you a 35-cent tax. Silly, right? After all, you were only exchanging one form of money for another. But that’s essentially what New Jersey’s sales tax on gold and silver bullion does. By eliminating this tax on the exchange of gold and silver, New Jersey would treat specie as money instead of a commodity. This represents a small step toward reestablishing gold and silver as legal tender and breaking down the Fed’s monopoly on money.

“We ought not to tax money – and that’s a good idea. It makes no sense to tax money,” former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul said during testimony in support of an Arizona bill that repealed capital gains taxes on gold and silver in that state. “Paper is not money, it’s fraud,” he continued.

The impact of enacting this legislation will go beyond mere tax policy. During an event after his Senate committee testimony, Paul pointed out that it’s really about the size and scope of government.

“If you’re for less government, you want sound money. The people who want big government, they don’t want sound money. They want to deceive you and commit fraud. They want to print the money. They want a monopoly. They want to get you conditioned, as our schools have conditioned us, to the point where deficits don’t matter.”

Practically speaking, eliminating taxes on the sale of gold and silver cracks open the door for people to begin using specie in regular business transactions. This marks an important small step toward currency competition.

The effect of treating gold and silver as money has been most dramatic in Utah where the legal tender law repealed all taxes on gold and silver bullion, opening the door for the development of a gold and silver market in the state. With some legal and tax hurdles cleared away by the state, the United Precious Metal Association (UPMA) in partnership with Alpine Gold Exchange set up the state’s first “gold bank.” The Utah Specie Legal Tender Act has also led to the creation of Goldbacks, a local, voluntary medium of exchange. Goldbacks are notes made from fractions of an ounce of physical gold. The company created a process that turns pure gold into a spendable physical form for small transactions.

BACKGROUND

The United States Constitution states in Article I, Section 10, “No State shall…make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.” Currently, all debts and taxes in New Jersey are either paid with Federal Reserve Notes (dollars) which were authorized as legal tender by Congress, or with coins issued by the U.S. Treasury — very few of which have gold or silver in them.

The Federal Reserve destroys this constitutional monetary system by creating a monopoly based on its fiat currency. Without the backing of gold or silver, the central bank can easily create money out of thin air. This not only devalues your purchasing power over time; it also allows the federal government to borrow and spend far beyond what would be possible in a sound money system. Without the Fed, the U.S. government wouldn’t be able to maintain all of its unconstitutional wars and programs. The Federal Reserve is the engine that drives the most powerful government in the history of the world.

The passage of S721 would remove one of the tax barriers that hinder the use of gold and silver as money in New Jersey.

Repealing taxes on gold and silver also takes the first step in the process of abolishing the Federal Reserve system by attacking it from the bottom up – pulling the rug out from under it by working to make its functions irrelevant at the state and local levels, and setting the stage to undermine the Federal Reserve monopoly by introducing competition into the monetary system.

In a paper presented at the Mises Institute, Constitutional tender expert Professor William Greene said when people in multiple states actually start using gold and silver instead of Federal Reserve Notes, it would effectively nullify the Federal Reserve and end the federal government’s monopoly on money.

“Over time, as residents of the state use both Federal Reserve notes and silver and gold coins, the fact that the coins hold their value more than Federal Reserve notes do will lead to a “reverse Gresham’s Law” effect, where good money (gold and silver coins) will drive out bad money (Federal Reserve notes). As this happens, a cascade of events can begin to occur, including the flow of real wealth toward the state’s treasury, an influx of banking business from outside of the state – as people in other states carry out their desire to bank with sound money – and an eventual outcry against the use of Federal Reserve notes for any transactions.”

Once things get to that point, Federal Reserve notes would become largely unwanted and irrelevant for ordinary people. Nullifying the Fed on a state-by-state level is what will get us there.

WHAT’S NEXT

Gov. Murphy will have 45 days to sign or veto S721. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature.

The post To the Governor: New Jersey Bill Would Repeal Sales Taxes on Gold and Silver first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Iowa Law Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 01 Jul 2024 11:27:56 +0000

DES MOINES, Iowa (July 1, 2024) – Today, an Iowa law prohibiting financial institutions operating in the state from requiring a credit card merchant code to track the purchases of firearms and ammunition went into effect.

The House Commerce Committee introduced House File 2464 (HF2464) on Feb. 20. The new law prohibits a financial institution operating in Iowa from requiring or assigning a firearms code that distinguishes a firearms dealer from any other retailer. “Firearms code” is defined as “a merchant category code approved by the international organization for standardization specifically for firearm dealers.” It is now also illegal to deny a transaction based solely on the acquirer’s assignment of a firearms code to the firearms retailer.

On April 11, the Senate passed HF2464 by a 45-0 vote. The bill was amended before passing in the Senate to remove the legal definition of “customer.” The House concurred by a vote of 73-24 on April 16. With Governor Kim Reynolds’ signature, the law went into effect July 1.

Under the law, government entities are prohibited from keeping a registry of privately owned firearms or the ownership of privately owned firearms.

The state attorney general is tasked with investigating alleged violations and given the sole authority to pursue legal action in district court if an alleged violator does not cease doing so 90 days after receiving a notice from their office. Those found guilty of violating the law are subject to a fine of no more than $1,000 per violation.

In response to legislation like HF2464, the major credit card payment networks have “paused” implementation of the firearms merchant code. In an email to Reuters, a Mastercard representative said such bills would cause “inconsistency” in how the code could be applied by merchants, banks, and payment networks. The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

BACKGROUND

In September 2022, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), based in Switzerland, approved a new merchant category code for firearm and ammunition merchants; In a letter to payment card networks, federal lawmakers stated that the new Merchant Category Code for firearms retailers would be “. . .the first step towards facilitating the collection of valuable financial data that could help law enforcement in countering the financing of terrorism efforts”, expressing a clear government expectation that networks will utilize the new Merchant Category Code to conduct mass surveillance of constitutionally protected firearms and ammunition purchases in cooperation with law enforcement;

The new Merchant Category Code will allow the banks, payment card networks, acquirers, and other entities involved in payment card processing to identify and separately track lawful payment card purchases at firearms retailers in the State of Iowa, paving the way for both unprecedented surveillance of Second Amendment activity and unprecedented information sharing between financial institutions and the government; This potential for cooperative surveillance and tracking of lawful firearms and ammunition purchases will have a significant chilling effect on citizens wishing to exercise their federal and state constitutional rights to keep and bear arms in Iowa.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Concern about the misuse of firearms databases isn’t just paranoia. The Taliban has reportedly used a firearm ownership database created by the U.S. government to track down gun owners and confiscate firearms in Afghanistan. This goes to show that even if you trust the people creating the database, it can fall into the wrong hands. In other words, the very existence of a database is a danger.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE.

The post Now in Effect: Iowa Law Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Indiana Law Takes Additional Steps Against a CBDC

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 01 Jul 2024 10:27:55 +0000

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (July 1, 2024) – Today, an Indiana law that takes additional steps to impede the practical impact of a central bank digital currency went into effect. The legislation expands a 2023 law that removed CBDC from the definition of money in the state.

Last year, Indiana became the first state to enact a law that removed a central bank digital currency (CBDC) from the definition of money in the state. On Jan. 9, Sen. Eric Koch introduced Senate Bill 180 (SB180) to expand on that law.

The new law prohibits state agencies from accepting payments made with a central bank digital currency for any service, tax, license, permit, fee, information, or other amount due the governmental body. It also bars government agencies from requiring payments to be made with a central bank digital currency.

Additionally, under the law, state government bodies are prohibited from advocating for or supporting the testing, adoption, or implementation of a central bank digital currency by the United States government.

The House passed SB180 by an 83-11 vote. The Senate approved the measure by a 48-0 vote. With Gov. Eric Holcomb’s signature, the law went into effect July 1.

The provisions in SB180 are similar to those in a law passed in Alabama in 2023, and in Georgia and South Dakota in 2024.

IN PRACTICE

How such legislation will play out in practice against a CBDC, should the federal government attempt to implement one, is unknown.

We’ve heard this song and dance on other issues before.

Why not?

“Roadblock” is likely the way this legislation to oppose a CBDC could play out, and it’s part of James Madison’s four-step blueprint for how states can stop federal programs.

CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCIES (CBDC)

At the root of the move toward government digital currency is “the war on cash.” The elimination of cash creates the potential for the government to track and even control consumer spending.

The government could even “turn off” an individual’s ability to make purchases. Bloomberg described just how much control a digital currency could give Chinese officials.

The PBOC has also indicated that it could put limits on the sizes of some transactions, or even require an appointment to make large ones. Some observers wonder whether payments could be linked to the emerging social-credit system, wherein citizens with exemplary behavior are ‘whitelisted’ for privileges, while those with criminal and other infractions find themselves left out. ‘China’s goal is not to make payments more convenient but to replace cash, so it can keep closer tabs on people than it already does,’ argues Aaron Brown, a crypto investor who writes for Bloomberg Opinion.”

The post Now in Effect: Indiana Law Takes Additional Steps Against a CBDC first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Tennessee Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 01 Jul 2024 09:27:54 +0000

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (July 1, 2024) – Today, a Tennessee law went into effect that will prohibit financial institutions operating in the state from using a credit card merchant category code that enables the tracking of firearm and ammunition purchases.

Sen. Jack Johnson and 14 cosponsors introduced Senate Bill 2223 (SB2223) in January. The new law prohibits any financial institution operation in the state from requiring or permitting “the assignment of a firearms code in a way that distinguishes a firearms retailer from other retailers.” “Firearms code” is defined in the bill as “a merchant category code approved by the International Organization for Standardization or an equivalent successor organization that is specifically assigned to a firearms retailer.”

SB2223 also prohibits all state and local government entities from keeping any list, record, or registry of privately owned firearms or the owners of such firearms. Financial institutions are prohibited from denying a transaction based on the code.

The Senate passed SB2223 by a 27-3 vote. The House concurred by a vote of 75-17. With Gov. Bill Lee’s signature in April, the law went into effect July 1.

The bill warns that a firearms merchant code would “have a significant chilling effect on citizens wishing to exercise their federal and state constitutional rights to keep and bear arms in Tennessee.”

The state attorney general would be authorized to investigate alleged violations of the law. Those found guilty would have 30 days to cease doing so, and if they refuse the AGO would be able to filed action in court. Upon conviction, the court would be able to impose a fine of up to $10,000 per violation.

Over the 2023-2024 legislative sessions, at least 14 states have passed similar legislation.

PAUSED

In response to legislation like SB2223, the major credit card payment networks have “paused” implementation of the firearms merchant code. In an email to Reuters, a Mastercard representative said such bills would cause “inconsistency” in how the code could be applied by merchants, banks, and payment networks. The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Data collected from this merchant code would almost certainly end up in federal government databases.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE.

The post Now in Effect: Tennessee Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Three South Dakota Laws Take Steps Against a Central Bank Digital Currency

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 01 Jul 2024 08:27:47 +0000

PIERRE, S.D. (July 1, 2024) – Today, three South Dakota laws go into effect that would take steps to reject a central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Rep. Mike Stevens and a bipartisan coalition of cosponsors introduced House Bill 1163 (HB1163) and House Bill 1161 (HB1161). The Committee on Commerce and Energy introduced Senate Bill 58 (SB58).

HB1163 and SB58 expressly exclude a CBDC from the definition of money in South Dakota, and HB1161 prohibits state agencies from accepting CBDC as a form of payment.

DEFINING MONEY

Under the South Dakota Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), “money” means “a medium of exchange currently authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government. The term includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more countries.”

HB1163 adds “The term is not intended and cannot be construed to create or adopt a central bank digital currency” to that definition.

The House approved the measure by a 44-21 vote and the Senate concurred with a vote of 27-6.

Similar legislation excluding CBDC from the definition of money has also been signed as law in Indiana, Florida, Tennessee, and Utah.

Along these same lines, SB58 specifically excludes CBDC from the definition of money as used in the South Dakota chapter regulating money transmission.

The House passed SB58 by a 51-18 vote and the Senate concurred with House amendments by a 31-3 margin.

BANNING CBDC AS A FORM OF STATE PAYMENT

HB1161 will specifically bar payments to the state in CBDC.

“Neither the state nor any of its agencies or subdivisions may accept a central bank 5 digital currency, whether foreign or domestic, as payment for taxes, fees, tuition, 6 admission, the settlement of any account or debt, or any other purpose.”

The new law will also require a person “engaging in the purchase or sale of any goods or services or trading in financial products” in South Dakota to accept another form of legal tender along with CBDC if they choose to take CBDC.

The House approved the measure by a 64-1 vote. The Senate concurred with a vote of 32-1.

The bill is similar to a law passed in Alabama in 2023 and in Indiana and Georgia in 2024.

IN PRACTICE

In the spirit of James Madison’s blueprint in Federalist #46, the enactment of HB1161 and HB1163 would create “impediments” to the implementation of a CBDC in South Dakota. Madison said “a refusal to cooperate with officers of the union” along with “the embarrassments created by legislative devices,” would “oppose, in any State, difficulties not to be despised.”

How such legislation will play out in practice against a CBDC, should the federal government attempt to implement one, is unknown.

We’ve heard this song and dance on other issues before.

Why not?

“Roadblock” is likely the way this legislation to oppose a CBDC could play out. Passage of the bills will put limits on the use of CBDC in the state, and HB1163’s provisions removing central bank digital currency from the definition of money would, as noted by one opponent of the legislation, put a CBDC “into the bucket of ‘general intangibles’” – rather than money, and wouldn’t ban its use completely.

CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCIES (CBDC)

At the root of the move toward government digital currency is “the war on cash.” The elimination of cash creates the potential for the government to track and even control consumer spending.

The government could even “turn off” an individual’s ability to make purchases. Bloomberg described just how much control a digital currency could give Chinese officials.

The PBOC has also indicated that it could put limits on the sizes of some transactions, or even require an appointment to make large ones. Some observers wonder whether payments could be linked to the emerging social-credit system, wherein citizens with exemplary behavior are ‘whitelisted’ for privileges, while those with criminal and other infractions find themselves left out. ‘China’s goal is not to make payments more convenient but to replace cash, so it can keep closer tabs on people than it already does,’ argues Aaron Brown, a crypto investor who writes for Bloomberg Opinion.”

The post Now in Effect: Three South Dakota Laws Take Steps Against a Central Bank Digital Currency first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Now in Effect: Indiana Law Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 01 Jul 2024 08:27:45 +0000

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (July 1, 2024) – Today, an Indiana law went into effect prohibiting financial institutions operating in the state from using a credit card merchant category code that enables the tracking of firearm and ammunition purchases.

Rep. Jake Teshka introduced House Bill 1084 (HB1084) on Jan. 8. The law prohibits financial institutions from requiring merchant category codes for a purchase that identifies a merchant as a firearms retailer distinct from a sporting goods or general merchandise retailer. It also prohibits a government entity from maintaining a firearm owner registry.

HB1084 includes provisions empowering the state attorney general to enforce the law and impose civil penalties for violations.

The House passed the final version of the bill by a 66-26 vote. The Senate approved the measure by a 39-9 margin. With Gov. Eric Holcomb’s signature, the law went into effect on July 1, 2024.

Over the 2023-2024 legislative sessions, at least 14 states have passed similar legislation.

IN EFFECT

In response to legislation like HB1084, major credit card payment networks “paused” implementation of the firearms merchant code. In an email to Reuters, a Mastercard representative said such bills would cause “inconsistency” in how the code could be applied by merchants, banks, and payment networks.

The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Data collected from this merchant code would almost certainly end up in federal government databases.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE.

The post Now in Effect: Indiana Law Prohibits Credit Card Codes to Track Firearms Purchases first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

To the Governor: North Carolina Bill Would Take First Step Against a Potential CBDC

Mike Maharrey — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:48:52 +0000

RALEIGH, N.C. (June 28, 2024) – On Wednesday, the North Carolina House gave final approval to a bill that would take a small step toward limiting the impact of any potential future central bank digital currency (CBDC) in the state, sending to the governor’s desk.

Rep. Harry Warren and a coalition of eight cosponsors introduced House Bill 690 (H690) on April 18. The legislation would prohibit any state governmental agency from accepting a payment using central bank digital currency. It would also bar all state governmental agencies from participating in any test of central bank digital currency.

The Senate passed the final version of H690 by a 39-5 vote. The House concurred with a 109-4 vote. The bill now moves to Gov. Roy Cooper’s desk for his consideration.

H690 is similar to laws passed in Alabama in 2023, and in Indiana, Georgia, and South Dakota in 2024.

IN PRACTICE

How such legislation will play out in practice against a CBDC, should the federal government attempt to implement one, is unknown.

We’ve heard this song and dance on other issues before.

Why not?

“Roadblock” is likely the way this legislation to oppose a CBDC could play out, and it’s part of James Madison’s four-step blueprint for how states can stop federal programs.

CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCIES (CBDC)

At the root of the move toward government digital currency is “the war on cash.” The elimination of cash creates the potential for the government to track and even control consumer spending.

The government could even “turn off” an individual’s ability to make purchases. Bloomberg described just how much control a digital currency could give Chinese officials.

The PBOC has also indicated that it could put limits on the sizes of some transactions, or even require an appointment to make large ones. Some observers wonder whether payments could be linked to the emerging social-credit system, wherein citizens with exemplary behavior are ‘whitelisted’ for privileges, while those with criminal and other infractions find themselves left out. ‘China’s goal is not to make payments more convenient but to replace cash, so it can keep closer tabs on people than it already does,’ argues Aaron Brown, a crypto investor who writes for Bloomberg Opinion.”

WHAT’S NEXT

Gov. Cooper will have 10 days from the date H690 is transmitted to his office (June 27) to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature.

The post To the Governor: North Carolina Bill Would Take First Step Against a Potential CBDC first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

To the Governor: Delaware Bill Would Facilitate Banking for Marijuana Businesses

Mike Maharrey — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:46:38 +0000

DOVER, Del. (June 28, 2024) – On Tuesday, the Delaware Senate gave final approval to a bill that would provide marijuana businesses operating in the state better access to banking and insurance services. The enactment of this legislation would remove a roadblock in front of the developing cannabis industry in Delaware and further nullify federal cannabis prohibition in practice.

Rep. Edward Osienski and a large bipartisan coalition of cosponsors introduced House Bill 355 (HB355) on March 21. The legislation would clarify that banks, credit unions, armored car services, and accounting services are not subject to prosecution under state law for simply working with legal cannabis businesses.

On June 25, the Senate passed HB355 by a 16-5 vote. The House had previously approved the measure by a 38-0 vote. It now goes to Gov. John Carney’s desk for his consideration.

According to the bill’s synopsis, “This Act aims to facilitate the operation of cannabis-related businesses by helping to ensure that such businesses have access to necessary financial and accounting services.”

In a press release, State Treasurer Colleen Davis said, “HB355 will provide state-level legal protection and a clear legal framework for banks, payment processors, and other financial service providers to follow.”

She also said that the law would make banks more comfortable serving the state’s marijuana industry despite federal banking regulations that prohibit it.

“It can also ease concerns about federal enforcement and regulatory compliance among these businesses—since it allows them to demonstrate to federal agencies that they’re following a clear legal framework, ultimately leading to a safer and more transparent marijuana industry.”

The bill is intended to allay fears that banks will be prosecuted or penalized for taking in marijuana-related accounts. The Federal government has used banking laws as a weapon in its unconstitutional war on cannabis by making it impossible for marijuana businesses to access the banking system – even in states where marijuana has been legalized. The feds can prosecute bankers for knowingly engaging with cannabis businesses under the Bank Secrecy Act, the USA Patriot Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

While the enactment of HB355 would not stop potential federal prosecution of a financial institution engaging in the medical marijuana business, it would eliminate the fear of state prosecution and cooperation with the feds.

Federal authorities depend on state cooperation to enforce virtually all of their laws. Without state cooperation, it is less likely banks will face prosecution.

EFFECT ON FEDERAL PROHIBITION

Under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) passed in 1970, the federal government maintains a complete prohibition of marijuana. Of course, the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to ban or regulate cannabis within the borders of a state, despite the opinion of the politically connected lawyers on the Supreme Court. If you doubt this, ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to institute federal alcohol prohibition.

Delaware legalized medical marijuana in 2011 and decriminalized the possession or consumption of a “personal-use quantity” of marijuana for adults 21 or over in 2015. The state legalized marijuana for adult use in 2023. These laws progressively removed a huge layer of laws prohibiting the possession and use of marijuana in the state even though federal prohibition remains in effect. This is significant because FBI statistics show that law enforcement makes approximately 99 of 100 marijuana arrests under state, not federal law. When states stop enforcing marijuana laws, they sweep away most of the basis for 99 percent of marijuana arrests.

Furthermore, figures indicate it would take 40 percent of the DEA’s yearly budget just to investigate and raid all of the dispensaries in Los Angeles – a single city in a single state. That doesn’t include the cost of prosecution. The lesson? The feds lack the resources to enforce marijuana prohibition without state assistance.

A GROWING MOVEMENT

Colorado, Washington state, Oregon, and Alaska were the first states to legalize recreational cannabis, and California, Nevada, Maine, and Massachusetts joined them after ballot initiatives in favor of legalization passed in November 2016. Michigan followed suit when voters legalized cannabis for general use in 2018. Vermont became the first state to legalize marijuana through a legislative act in 2018. Illinois followed suit in 2019. New Jersey, Montana, and Arizona all legalized recreational marijuana through ballot measures in the 2020 election. In 2021, New York, New Mexico, Virginia, and Connecticut legalized marijuana through legislative action, and Rhode Island legalized cannabis for adult use in 2022. Missouri and Maryland legalized marijuana in November 2022. Ohio voters approved marijuana for adult use in the November election. Currently, 38 states allow cannabis for medical use, and 24 have legalized it for recreational use.

The lesson here is pretty straightforward. As Tenth Amendment Center Executive Director Michael Boldin noted, “When enough people say, ‘No!’ to the federal government, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, there’s not much the feds can do to shove their so-called laws, regulations, or mandates down our throats.”

The introduction of HB355 demonstrates another important reality. Once a state puts laws in place legalizing cannabis, they tend to eventually expand. As the state tears down some barriers, markets develop and demand expands. That creates pressure to further relax state law. This bill represents a further erosion of unconstitutional federal marijuana prohibition. It also demonstrates an important strategic point. Passing bills that take a step forward sets the stage, even if they aren’t perfect. Opening the door clears the way for additional steps. You can’t take the second step before you take the first.

WHAT’S NEXT

If the legislature transmits HB355 to Gov. Carney’s office before the session ends (Scheduled for June 30), he will have 10 days to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature. If the bill is transmitted after the session ends, the governor will have 30 days and if he fails to act, the bill would be pocket vetoed.

The post To the Governor: Delaware Bill Would Facilitate Banking for Marijuana Businesses first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Tired of Endless Political Fraud? There’s a Real Path to Liberty

Michael Boldin — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:29:55 +0000

Honesty in politics? Yeah, we know – sounds impossible. But check out this episode and join us on a true path to liberty.

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: June 28, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Richard Henry Lee – Letter to Thomas Lee Shippen (21 Sept 1791)

Thomas Jefferson – Draft for the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Alexander Hamilton – Federalist 33 (3 Jan 1788)

Noah Webster – The Revolution in France (1794)

John Dickinson – Broadside Against the Stamp Act (1765)

James Iredell – North Carolina Ratifying Convention (28 July 1788)

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to Lafayette (2 Apr 1790)

Thomas Paine – Rights of Man, Part II (1792)

John Adams – “U” to the Boston Gazette (29 Aug 1763)

Thomas Paine – Forester Letter III, Pennsylvania Journal (24 Apr 1776)

Benjamin Franklin – Letter to Jane Mecom (1 Nov 1773)

Samuel Adams – Loyalty and Sedition (1748)

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to Rev. Charles Clay (27 Jan 1790)

James Otis, Jr – Of the Natural Rights of Colonists (1763)

Lysander Spooner – An Essay on the Trial by Jury (1852)

State of the Nullification Movement Report

Samuel Adams – Candidus, Boston Gazette (14 Oct 1771)

Dr. Joseph Warren – Massacre Day Oration (5 Mar 1772)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Tired of Endless Political Fraud? There’s a Real Path to Liberty first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Resist and Nullify: The American Revolution’s Fundamental Principle

Michael Boldin — Wed, 26 Jun 2024 20:05:10 +0000

The American Revolution wasn’t just about throwing off a king. It was built on a radical idea: that the people have the right to resist and nullify usurpations of power by any government. Today, we’ll dive deep into this secret weapon for liberty from the founding fathers – something they not only considered a right, but a duty.

Path to Liberty: June 26, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Luther Martin – Genuine Information (28 Dec 1787)

John Jay – Letter to Samuel Miller (28 Feb 1800)

James Madison – Report of 1800 (7 Jan 1800)

James Wilson – Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention (24 Nov 1787)

Patrick Henry – Resolutions Against the Stamp Act (29 May 1765)

John Adams – Letter to William Tudor, Sr (21 Aug 1818)

John Adams – Letter to William Tudor, Sr (16 Aug 1818)

Jonathan Mayhew – The Snare Broken (23 May 1766)

Algernon Sidney – Discourses Concerning Government

John Locke – Two Treatises of Civil Government (1689)

Theophilus Parsons – Massachusetts Ratifying Convention (23 Jan 1788)

Thomas Gordon – Cato’s Letters No. 42 (26 Aug 1721)

Alexander Hamilton – The Farmer Refuted (23 Feb 1775)

Alexander Hamilton – Federalist 33 (3 Jan 1788)

Samuel Adams – Candidus, Boston Gazette (14 Oct 1771)

St. George Tucker – View of the Constitution of the United States (1803)

William Emerson – An Oration in Commemoration of the Anniversary of American Independence (1802)

James Otis, Jr – Freeborn American (27 Apr 1767)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Resist and Nullify: The American Revolution’s Fundamental Principle first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

10th Amendment: Top-5 Principles from the American Revolution

Michael Boldin — Mon, 24 Jun 2024 19:55:02 +0000

Thomas Jefferson called the 10th Amendment the “foundation of the Constitution” for a reason. It enshrines many of the very principles that sparked the American Revolution – principles that even shaped his words in the Declaration of Independence! In this episode, we’ll dive into these Top 5 revolutionary ideas that have been ignored for far too long.

Path to Liberty: June 24, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Wiki: Divine Right of Kings

David Ramsay – The History of the American Revolution (1789)

Algernon Sidney – Discourses Concerning Government, Section 20 (1690)

George Mason – Virginia Declaration of Rights (12 June 1776)

Robert Livingston – New York Ratifying Convention (19 June 1788)

Enos Hitchcock – Oration in Commemoration Independence (4 July 1793)

Maharrey – Sovereignty and Agency

James Otis, Jr – Rights of the British Colonies, Asserted and Proved (1764)

Thomas Paine – Dissertations on Government (1786)

James Wilson – Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention (24 Nov 1787)

Alexander Hamilton – Federalist 78 (28 May 1788)

James Otis, Jr – Considerations on Behalf of the Colonists (4 Sept 1765)

John Jay – Address to the People of New York (1788)

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (13 June 1788)

James Otis, Jr – Vindication of the Conduct of the House of Representatives of the Province of the Massachusetts-Bay (1762)

Episode – Arbitrary Government: How the Founders Defined Tyranny

Luther Martin – Genuine Information (28 Dec 1787)

Maryland Farmer No. 3. Part 1 (7 Mar 1788)

John Dickinson – Broadside Against the Stamp Act (1765)

James Otis Jr – Freeborn American (27 Apr 1767)

James Madison – Federalist 48 (1 Feb 1788)

John Hancock – Massachusetts Ratifying Convention (6 Feb 1788)

John Dickinson – Fabius IV (19 Apr 1788)

Thomas Jefferson – Draft for the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post 10th Amendment: Top-5 Principles from the American Revolution first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Was the Constitution Sold on a Lie? Shays’ Rebellion and Ratification

Michael Boldin — Fri, 21 Jun 2024 18:08:11 +0000

Shays’ Rebellion was repeatedly cited by Federalists as a primary reason to replace the Articles of Confederation with a Constitution with a stronger central government. But what if the threat was exaggerated? Anti-Federalists sure thought so. In this episode, we’ll dive into the debate and explore James Madison’s surprising later admission about this pivotal moment in American history

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: June 21, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Episode – Thomas Jefferson: A Little Rebellion Now and Then

Shays’ Rebellion

Wiki – Rebellion Consequences

Maharrey – Was Shays’ Rebellion Overblown? The Debate Over the Constitution

John Jay – Letter to William Carmichael (4 Jan 1787)

George Washington – Letter to Henry Knox (3 Feb 1787)

James Madison – Vices of the Political System of the United States

Oliver Ellsworth – A Landholder V (3 Dec 1787)

Alexander Hamilton – Federalist 21 (12 Dec 1787)

Alexander Hamilton – Federalist 25 (21 Dec 1787)

Agrippa II (27 Nov 1787)

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (7 June 1788)

Centinel XVIII (9 Apr 1788)

Federal Farmer XVII (23 Jan 1788)

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to William Stephens Smith (13 Nov 1787)

James Madison – Letter to John G. Jackson (28 Dec 1821)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Was the Constitution Sold on a Lie? Shays’ Rebellion and Ratification first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Knowledge is Power. Ignorance is Weakness. Learn the Founders’ Truth

Michael Boldin — Wed, 19 Jun 2024 23:44:47 +0000

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free”

Thomas Jefferson was right: “It expects what never was, and never will be.”

The people have ignored this timeless truth for far too long. Education on the original, legal meaning of the Constitution – along with founding principles going back to the American Revolution – are virtually non-existent in our government-run schools today.

Abigail Adams understood what needs to be done:

“Learning is not attained by chance, it must be sought for with ardor and attended to with diligence.”

That’s why the work we’re doing is so important. TAC is setting the foundation to act as a counterweight to the relentless propaganda of the government-run schools, and the widespread ignorance the system has created.

Jefferson put it like this: “Knowledge is power, and ignorance is weakness.”

The focus of our work has a special emphasis on building this strength through knowledge of the Founders’ strategy to protect and defend the constitution and liberty – without waiting on the federal government to magically do something it almost never does – limit its own power.

Benjamin Rush summed it up this way: “Freedom can only exist in the society of knowledge. Without learning, mean are incapable of knowing their rights.”

We’ve made some serious headway on this front – but as we celebrate our 18 year anniversary this month, we recognize that we’ve still got a long way to go.

There’s absolutely nothing that helps us roll up our sleeves every single day to reach and teach more and more people – more than the financial faith and support of our members.

You can join as a member for as little as 2 bucks/month – there are also annual, 5-year and lifetime options here:

https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/

If you prefer to make a one-time donation instead, you can use the link below to submit online or by mail – https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/donate/

With your help, we can continue to push back against the forces that continuously work to destroy the constitution and liberty.

Turning things around from the largest government in history to a real “land of the free” won’t be quick and it won’t be easy. There is no silver bullet. But armed with the knowledge, advice and experience of the founders and old revolutionaries – it’s a battle the people and the states can win in the long run.

As Thomas Paine put it, “The strength and powers of despotism consist wholly in the fear of resisting it.”

THANK YOU FOR READING AND YOUR SUPPORT!

The post Knowledge is Power. Ignorance is Weakness. Learn the Founders’ Truth first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Delaware House Committee Passes Bill to Prohibit Reverse-Keyword Surveillance

Mike Maharrey — Wed, 19 Jun 2024 22:41:15 +0000

DOVER, Del. (June 19, 2023) – Yesterday, a Delaware House committee passed a bill that would ban reverse-keyword search orders. Passage of the legislation would not only protect privacy in Delaware; it would also hinder the growth of the federal surveillance state.

Rep. Madinah Wilson-Anton introduced House Bill 445 (HB445) on May 14. The legislation would prohibit state government agencies including local law enforcement agencies and courts from requesting, issuing, or enforcing reverse-keyword court orders and reverse-keyword requests. It would also prohibit government agencies from seeking the assistance of any agency of the federal government or any agency of the government of another state in obtaining information or data from a reverse-keyword court order or a reverse-keyword request if the government entity would be barred from directly seeking such information under the law.

A reverse-keyword search seeks to “obtain records or information identifying any unnamed persons, by name or other unique identifier, who electronically searched for a particular word, phrase, or website, or who visited a particular website through a link generated by such a search.” For instance, a reverse keyword search would allow police to pinpoint every individual you did a Google search for a specific keyword such as “assault rifle.”

HB445 would create a private right of action for an individual whose personal information was obtained in violation of the law. It would also require the suppression of evidence derived from an unlawful reverse location or reverse keyword search.

On June 18, the House Judiciary Committee passed HB445 by a 5-1 vote.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE. In other words, stingrays create the potential for the federal government to track the movement of millions of Americans with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.

Limiting information collected by state and local law enforcement agencies limits the amount of information that can flow into federal databases through fusion centers and the ISE.

WHAT’S NEXT

HB445 can now move to the full House for consideration.

The post Delaware House Committee Passes Bill to Prohibit Reverse-Keyword Surveillance first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Top 3 Anti-Federalist Arguments: Controversy over the Constitution

Michael Boldin — Wed, 19 Jun 2024 20:18:47 +0000

Was the Constitution a recipe for tyranny? That’s what Patrick Henry, Brutus, Federal Farmer and many other Anti-Federalists feared. In this episode, we’ll explore three of their top arguments against ratification and their warnings about centralized power as a massive threat to liberty.

Path to Liberty: June 19, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Carol Berkin – Inventing the American Constitution

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (7 June 1788)

Brutus I (18 Oct 1787)

A Farmer – Philadelphia Freeman’s Journal (16 Apr 1788)

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (9 June 1788)

The Dissent of the Minority of the Pennsylvania Convention (18 Dec 1787)

Episode – Consolidation Leads to Force: Anti-Federalist Cato No. 3

Episode – The Dangers of Consolidation: Anti-Federalist Brutus No. 1

William Grayson – Virginia Ratifying Convention (11 June 1788)

Federal Farmer IV (12 Oct 1787)

Episode – Infinite‌ ‌and‌ ‌Incomprehensible:‌ ‌Anti-Federalist‌ ‌Brutus‌ ‌No.‌ ‌5‌

Jason Mandresh – Founder of the Day

Brutus XI (31 Jan 1788)

Brutus XII (7 Feb 1788)

Elbridge Gerry to President of Senate and Speaker of House of Representatives of Massachusetts (18 Oct 1787)

George Mason – Virginia Ratifying Convention (23 June 1788)

Impartial Examiner I (20 Feb 1788)

John DeWitt II (27 Oct 1787)

Samuel Adams – Letter to Richard Henry Lee (24 Aug 1789)

Richard Henry Lee – Letter to Patrick Henry (14 Sept 1789)

George Mason – Virginia Ratifying Convention (4 June 1788)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Top 3 Anti-Federalist Arguments: Controversy over the Constitution first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Vermont Law Authorizes Overdose Prevention Centers Despite Federal Prohibition

Mike Maharrey — Wed, 19 Jun 2024 03:26:03 +0000

MONTPELIER, Vt. (June 18, 2024) – On Monday, the Vermont House and Senate overrode Governor Phil Scott’s veto, enacting a law authorizing the establishment of “overdose prevention centers” in the state despite federal law prohibiting the same.

Rep. Taylor Small and a large coalition of cosponsors introduced House Bill 72 (H72) in January. The new law authorizes the establishment of overdose prevention centers (OPC) in the state if approved by the municipal government.

Also known as “safe injection sites,” the centers will provide a safe place for substance abusers to seek help, treatment, and resources. Drug users will be able to legally possess and use prohibited substances in the centers under medical supervision. OPCs will also provide resources such as clean needles to addicts. Staff on site will be trained to reverse an overdose if needed.

H72 grants amnesty to individuals in possession of a regulated drug in violation of state law while at an overdose prevention center.

Gov. Scott vetoed the bill after it cleared both the House and Senate last month. On June 18, the House overrode the governor’s veto by a 104-41 vote. There was more drama in the Senate. The initial vote failed, but upon reconsideration, Sen. Richard Westman flipped and the measure passed 20-9. Westerman later told reporters that he was confused about which bill was up for a vote when he initially voted no.

“I wasn’t paying as close attention as I should,” Westman said. “I embarrassed myself. It’s the first time in 40 years I’ve ever had to make a motion like that.”

With Scott’s veto overridden, the law goes into immediate effect.

According to a paper by the Cato Institute, “OPCs have been preventing overdose deaths and the spread of infections for more than 40 years. In 2023, there were 147 OPCs operating in 91 communities and 16 countries. Two have been saving lives in New York City since December 2021 and had reversed more than 1,000 overdoses by the summer of 2023.”

City officials in Burlington have already indicated they will approve the establishment of an OPC in that city. It will serve as a pilot program. The bill allocates $1.1 million in fiscal 2025 to establish the OPC in Burlington.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROHIBITION

The enactment of H72 ignores federal law prohibiting OPCs.

Known as the “crackhouse statute,” 21 U.S.C. Section 856 makes it illegal to “knowingly open, lease, rent, use, or maintain any place, whether permanently or temporarily, for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or using any controlled substance.”

Two OPCs already operate in New York City, and Rhode Island passed a law authorizing them in 2022. As the Cato Institute put it, “New York City and Rhode Island are defying federal law.”

Minnesota has also authorized OPCs, but the Minnesota Department of Health has not opened any because “federal law has been interpreted as prohibiting safer use spaces.”

But as Cato pointed out, “As more state and local governments defy federal law and embrace OPCs, it might move Congress to repeal or amend the “crackhouse statute.”

This is the strategy laid out by James Madison in Federalist #46. A “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” provides an extremely effective method to render federal laws, effectively unenforceable because most enforcement actions rely on help, support, and leadership from the states.

LEGAL BASIS

States do not have to enforce federal laws and can take action that conflicts with them. This fact rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce any federal act or program – whether constitutional or not. The anti-commandeering doctrine is based primarily on five Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842.

In Murphy v. NCAA (2018), the Court held that Congress can’t take any action that “dictates what a state legislature may and may not do” even when the state action conflicts with federal law. Samuel Alito wrote, “A more direct affront to state sovereignty is not easy to imagine.” He continued:

The anticommandeering doctrine may sound arcane, but it is simply the expression of a fundamental structural decision incorporated into the Constitution, i.e., the decision to withhold from Congress the power to issue orders directly to the States … Conspicuously absent from the list of powers given to Congress is the power to issue direct orders to the governments of the States. The anticommandeering doctrine simply represents the recognition of this limit on congressional authority.

No determination of constitutionality is necessary to invoke the anti-commandeering doctrine. State and local governments can refuse to enforce federal laws or implement federal programs whether they are constitutional or not.

The post Vermont Law Authorizes Overdose Prevention Centers Despite Federal Prohibition first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Unlock the Pursuit of Happiness: The Founders’ Ignored Message

Michael Boldin — Mon, 17 Jun 2024 18:58:03 +0000

Forget everything the government-run schools taught you about the “pursuit of happiness.” The Founders had a far more radical understanding – something most history lessons miss or completely ignore. In this episode, we’ll unlock this message in the Declaration of Independence, the way the founders intended.

Path to Liberty: June 17, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Maharrey – Pursuit of Happiness: “We Cannot be Happy without Being Free”

John Locke – An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding (1690)

Burlamaqui – The Principles of Natural and Politic Law (1751)

Virginia Declaration of Rights (12 June 1776)

John Dickinson – Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania XII (1767)

John Dickinson – A North American – Address to the Committee of Correspondence in Barbados (1766)

Mercy Otis Warren – History of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution

Arthur Lee – An appeal to the justice and interests of the people of Great Britain, in the present dispute with America (1775)

John Adams – Discourses on Davila (1790)

James Madison – Property (1792)

John Jay – Address to the People of Great Britain (21 Oct 1774)

Samuel Adams – The Rights of the Colonists (20 Nov 1772)

James Otis, Jr. – The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (1763)

Episode – Locke vs Spooner on Consent of the Governed

Declaration of Independence

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Unlock the Pursuit of Happiness: The Founders’ Ignored Message first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Louisiana Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act Signed Into Law

Mike Maharrey — Mon, 17 Jun 2024 18:21:29 +0000

BATON ROUGE, LA. (June 17, 2024) – Last week, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed the “Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act” into law. The new law prohibits financial institutions from using a credit card merchant code that would enable the tracking of firearm and ammunition purchases.

Sen. Blake Miguez filed Senate Bill 301 (SB301) on March 1. The new law prohibits any financial institution operating in the state from requiring or permitting “the assignment of a firearms code in a way that distinguishes a firearms retailer from other retailers.”

SB301 also prohibits all state and local government entities from keeping any list, record, or registry of privately owned firearms or the owners of such firearms. Financial institutions are prohibited from denying a transaction based on the code. Those found guilty in a court of violating the law will be subject to a fine not to exceed $1,000 per violation, with the court determining the amount by factors “including the financial resources of the violator and the harm or risk of harm to the rights under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 11 of the Constitution of Louisiana, resulting from the violation.”

The House passed the final version of the bill by a vote of 74-26. The Senate approved the measure by a 27-9 vote. With Gov. Landry’s signature, the law will go into effect Aug. 1

Over the 2023-2024 legislative sessions, at least 14 states have passed similar legislation.

PAUSED

In response to legislation like SB301, the major credit card payment networks have “paused” implementation of the firearms merchant code. In an email to Reuters, a Mastercard representative said such bills would cause “inconsistency” in how the code could be applied by merchants, banks, and payment networks. The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

The more states that ban such codes, the more likely this program gets scrapped permanently.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

Data collected from this merchant code would almost certainly end up in federal government databases.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE.

The post Louisiana Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act Signed Into Law first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Laws That Go Beyond the Constitution Aren’t Laws at All

Mike Maharrey — Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:57:46 +0000

Federal laws that go beyond the Constitution aren’t actually laws at all. They’re what the founders called usurpations – which is just a fancy word for theft or power, and every usurpation is “void.”

@tenthamendmentcenter Stealing Power: Unconstitutional Laws are VOID (founders truth) #liberty #history #founders #libertarian #constitution #10thAmendment #historytok #quoteoftheday ♬ original sound – TenthAmendmentCenter

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Constitution Myth Busted: Usurpations are Void

Declaration of Independence: Usurpation is Treason

Usurpation: A Weapon By Which Free Governments Are Destroyed

The post Laws That Go Beyond the Constitution Aren’t Laws at All first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Advancing Liberty: Rights are Not Gifts from Government

Michael Boldin — Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:52:25 +0000

Rights are not gifts from government. It’s not really “liberty” if it requires a government permission slip.

This view is almost totally lost among the general public today – but it was common among the founders and old revolutionaries. Thomas Jefferson may have summed it up best:

“A free people claim their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as a gift from their chief magistrate.”

This “natural rights” view is the foundation for all the rest. And getting the foundation right is essential for getting the solution right too – that is, going from where we are today to a real “land of the free.”

That’s why we focus so much time and energy on teaching people about these foundational principles from the American Revolution.

There’s absolutely nothing that helps us roll up our sleeves every single day to reach and teach more and more people – more than the financial faith and support of our members.

We are proud to have you as part of our community, and we humbly ask for your financial support in our mission to protect and defend the Constitution and liberty – whether the government likes it, or not. (they don’t)

You can join as a member for as little as 2 bucks/month – there are also annual, 5-year and lifetime options here: https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/

If you prefer to make a one-time donation instead, you can use the link below to submit online or by mail – https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/donate/

As we approach our 18 year anniversary later this month – we couldn’t be more grateful for any consideration you can give to joining and supporting the TAC today.

With your help, we can continue to push back against the forces that continuously work to destroy the constitution and liberty.

As Jefferson put it: “The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches. We must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time, and eternally press forward for what is yet to get.”

The post Advancing Liberty: Rights are Not Gifts from Government first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

The Founders on Power: 8 Essential Principles for a FREE Society

Michael Boldin — Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:03:20 +0000

The Founders knew that freedom can ONLY exist when power is kept under strict limits. Anything else is arbitrary power – how they defined tyranny.

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: June 14, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

1. POWER FLOWS FROM THE PEOPLE

George Mason – Virginia Declaration of Rights (12 June 1776)

Robert Livingston – New York Ratifying Convention (19 June 1788)

2. POWER MUST HAVE DEFINED LIMITS

Richard Henry Lee – Letter to Patrick Henry (28 May 1789)

Maryland Farmer No. 3. Part 1 (7 Mar 1788)

Brutus IV (29 Nov 1787)

3. POWER NOT GIVEN IS RETAINED

George Nicholas – Virginia Ratifying Convention (10 June 1788)

Edmund Randolph – Virginia Ratifying Convention (21 June 1788)

4. POWER ALWAYS SEEKS TO GROW

Abigail Adams – Letter to John Adams (27 Nov 1775)

Federal Farmer No. IV (12 Oct 1787)

Samuel Adams – Letter to James Warren (24 Oct 1780)

5. ARBITRARY POWER IS TYRANNY

Thomas Paine – Rights of Man, Part II (1792)

John Locke – Chapter 18 – Tyranny

St. George Tucker – View of the Constitution of the United States (1803)

6. POWER TO DO GOOD IS THE POWER TO DO EVIL

John Jay – A Citizen of New York (15 Apr 1788)

Oliver Ellsworth – A Landholder III (19 Nov 1787)

7. CONSOLIDATION IS TYRANNY

Patrick Henry – Virginia Ratifying Convention (9 June 1788)

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to Joseph C. Cabell (2 Feb 1816)

8. POWER DOESN’T LIMIT ITSELF

Episode – Constitution 101: Enforcement Mechanism

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post The Founders on Power: 8 Essential Principles for a FREE Society first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Delaware House Committee Passes Bill to Legalize Limited Raw Milk Sales

Mike Maharrey — Thu, 13 Jun 2024 15:49:20 +0000

DOVER, Del. (June 13, 2024) – On Tuesday, a Delaware House committee passed a bill that would legalize the sale of raw milk by producers directly to consumers in the state. Under current law, all raw milk sales are illegal in the state.

On June 11, the House Agriculture Committee passed SB273 by a 6-3 vote. The Senate has already approved the measure by a 14-5 vote.

Passage into law would also take an important step toward further rejecting a federal prohibition scheme in practice and effect.

“However, consumers are increasingly demanding the opportunity to purchase raw milk in Delaware, rather than traveling to other states that permit raw milk sales. Allowing raw milk and products derived from raw milk to be sold in Delaware will respond to that demand while also providing new economic opportunities for Delaware dairy producers.”

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROHIBITION

FDA officials insist that unpasteurized milk poses a health risk because of its susceptibility to contamination from cow manure, a source of E. coli.

“It is the FDA’s position that raw milk should never be consumed,” agency spokeswoman Tamara N. Ward said in November 2011.

Not only do the feds ban the transportation of raw milk across state lines, but they also claim the authority to ban unpasteurized milk within the borders of a state.

When states allow the sale of raw milk within their borders, it takes an important step toward nullifying this federal prohibition scheme in practice and effect.

WHAT’S NEXT

SB273 can now move to the full House for debate and a vote.

The post Delaware House Committee Passes Bill to Legalize Limited Raw Milk Sales first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

2nd Amendment: 8 Key Principles From the Founders Ignored Today

Michael Boldin — Wed, 12 Jun 2024 23:12:41 +0000

They don’t teach this in government-run schools. In this episode, we explore 8 foundational principles from the founders about the right to keep and bear arms that are almost totally ignored today.

Path to Liberty: June 12, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

St. George Tucker – View of the Constitution of the United States (1803)

Samuel Adams – The Rights of the Colonists (20 Nov 1772)

Theophilus Parsons – Massachusetts Ratifying Convention (5 Feb 1788)

Mercy Otis Warren – Observations on the New Constitution (1788)

James Wilson – Lectures on Law

Episode – 4 Main Reasons for the 2nd Amendment

Tench Coxe – A Pennsylvanian, To The People of the United States, Philadelphia Gazette (20 Feb 1788)

James Madison – Federalist 46 (29 Jan 1788)

George Mason – Virginia Ratifying Convention (14 June 1788)

Noah Webster – An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (17 Oct 1787)

James Iredell – North Carolina Ratifying Convention (28 July 1788)

Roger Sherman – Debate in the House of Representatives (1790)

Thomas Jefferson – Letter to Peter Carr (19 Aug 1785)

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post 2nd Amendment: 8 Key Principles From the Founders Ignored Today first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

Pro Liberty, Anti-Empire: The Forgotten Founder Who Lived the Revolution

Michael Boldin — Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:11:25 +0000

Have you ever heard of Dr. Joseph Warren? He was a key figure in the American Revolution, a fiery orator who defied British tyranny, and the man who sent Paul Revere out on his famous Midnight Ride. This video dives into the incredible story of Joseph Warren, the “Pro Liberty, Anti-Empire” Founding “Grandfather” that history almost totally ignores.

Path to Liberty: June 10, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

Maharrey – Remembering Patriot and Revolutionary War Hero Joseph Warren

Book – Joseph Warren: The Boston Tea Party, Bunker Hill, and the Birth of American Liberty

Tom Malone – Dr. Joseph Warren: Architect of the Revolution

A True Patriot (29 Feb 1768)

A True Patriot (14 Mar 1768)

Harvard – Recalling Joseph Warren–physician, revolutionary, leader

Episode – Remembering Boston Massacre Day: Joseph Warren Edition

Massacre Day Oration (5 Mar 1772)

Joseph Warren – Letter to Samuel Adams (15 June 1774)

Maharrey – Suffolk Resolves Calling for Non-Compliance and Resistance to British Acts

Suffolk Resolves (17 Sept 1774)

Episode – Blueprint for Liberty: The Suffolk Resolves of 1774

Episode – “Freedom is the Prize” – Joseph Warren’s Boston Massacre Day Oration v2

Massacre Day Oration (6 Mar 1775)

George Wildrick – Dr. Joseph Warren: leader in medicine, politics, and revolution

Letter to Benjamin Franklin (26 Apr 1775)

Jason Mandresh – Founder of the Day

Lawrence Reed – The Founding Father Who Fought for Liberty at Bunker Hill, and Paid With His Life

Wiki: Battle and Death

The Death of General Warren

New England Historical Society

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble

FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:

Become a Member: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/
Email Newsletter: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register
RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest

The post Pro Liberty, Anti-Empire: The Forgotten Founder Who Lived the Revolution first appeared on Tenth Amendment Center.

End the Fed from the Bottom Up: The Founders’ Plan You can Use Now

Michael Boldin — Fri, 07 Jun 2024 20:03:15 +0000

The federal reserve is never going to end itself. And congress is not going to shut off its own private money printer. So it’s up to the people and the states – as the founders advised – to get the job done in support of the Constitution and liberty.

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: June 7, 2024

SHOW LINKS:
JOIN TAC

Show Archives

James Madison – Federalist 46 (29 Jan 1788)

Episode – Constitution 101: Enforcement Mechanism

Maharrey – Nullify the Fed from the Bottom Up: A Step by Step Approach

Goldback

MORE VIDEO SOURCES
Watch on Rumble