Archive for the ‘10th Amendment’ Category

I dedicate this Gestalt open letter to 1 Eduardo Saverin, who is currently being persecuted by this government for trying to escape the tax slavery of this nation. May you find happiness apart from the implied US threat of imprisonment and fiscal insolvency.

I assure you there are many, many reasons for Eduardo to want to expatriate from the US in a big hurry and take the blessings of his wealth and ingenuity elsewhere.

It was originally drafted August 10th, 2011.  It has been updated with links.

Dear America,

I love you.  You’re my country but I’m considering leaving you.

There’s lots of reasons why, but the most important ones are that you’ve become abusive, controlling and unreasonable.

You have a problem. You’re bottoming out right now. It’s a good thing because maybe you’ll reconsider the way you do things.You don’t listen to us, your people. In fact, you keep these ridiculous lists and demand that your gangster buddies keep tabs on us when we are at our jobs, running to the bank and at home on our computers.

You’re broke. You spent all our money on your addiction to foreign wars.  After awhile you didn’t care if it was just or unjust you…kept making war happen.  No matter what we said or did, how many people petitioned you or who emptied into the streets, you can’t stop paying for the wars. You’ve fleeced us to death.  You’ve borrowed us into bankruptcy.

Now that we’re all broke- you blame and cast aside the poor for their poverty, the sick for their illness and the migrant for their quest for opportunity.

Your enablers, your crooked money laundering mobsters on K Street robbed us, your kids, and your grandmother while you watched.  You didn’t care.  As long as Afghanistan could keep it going so you and your buddies could sport kill civilians.

Now the world blames us because we can’t control you.  You are so far gone.  People still show up to work in government, but they are all numb and half crazy because none of this has any meaning or makes any sense.   They fight each other to distract themselves from the fact that this government threw its internal compass into the abyss and there’s isn’t a whole lot that can be done.  The egg is broken and scrambled.

I thought you should know I’m not going to wait around while you try to figure out how to put me in a cage so you can keep it all going.  As you are reading this letter, I may be calculating a move as a despised refugee.

I’m not a criminal but if I hang around you will manufacture something I did wrong so you can trap me and keep me in place.  You don’t care about any of our  rights.  You don’t even see us.  All you see is war. Your countrymen who oppose this are your enemy. Anyone in the way of your fix is the problem.  So you dispatch your thugs to watch us “for our safety”.

You need us, but some of us are inconveniently opposed to your way of life; which happens to be sucking anyone in your reach down a dark hole.

I can count on the fact that I will be hated for your selfish, shortsighted ways with the world and steering everyone, including us, by the butt of a gun.  Yeah, you were powerful, but now we can’t care.

We have to take care of ourselves.  We are are all out of money. We have kids and sick, elderly parents who need our help.  You are going to take care of your wars until it kills you and everyone around you.

We would reach out to you, but you’re not *really* there.  You’re just not who you used to be.

America, who are you and what have you done with my country?

Don’t worry I’m not waiting around on you to find out.  


An American Citizen

10th Amendment proves useful even if no one says anything about using it

BTC Commentary — Our Constitutional Bill of Rights are being perpetually scrambled, challenged and re-challenged. The name of the political game is to get you maneuvered out of your rights. Why should a battle over your 10th Amendment be any different?

The 10th Amendment is about powers reserved to the States. States have it and States use it. However, they seldom make a public or corporate ceremony about invoking use of the 10th Amendment. However, when states do a corporate move to kick a federal law back to Washington it is called nullification.

Governor Schweitzer recently publicly knocked the principle of nullification.  Loud, patriotic belly bursts of declared independence over States’ rights doesn’t go over so well with Democrats.

However, he had no problem exercising his State’s right to dump federal regulations of the Real ID Act over the rails. He just didn’t dare say out loud, “I’ll be invoking my 10th Amendment now.” He simply did it.

Wisconsin union workers who overran the State capitol recently with protest signs and vigils didn’t say, “I am  now using my 1st Amendment rights”.  In similar fashion, Ollie North said, “I can’t recall,” instead of “I plead the 5th.” And in the same manner 25 States across the nation showed DHS they weren’t implementing Real ID by the federal deadlines, footing the expense. This was nullifcation by action versus a direct corporate ceremony with one chief or constituency taking credit.

Shortly thereafter, the Tenth Amendment Center stated, “The United States just nullified Real ID by the right of the 10th Amendment!” And it was true.

It seems invoking the 10th Amendment right is something Democratically led States can’t be openly proud of. In fact, it is seen by some Democratic interests as almost amoral or at type of political impropriety.

How could a corporate use of the Bill of Rights be considered immoral?

The first reason is strictly political pragmatism. Many Democrats consider it “immoral” for States to opt-out of federal tax strategies. Any move against government solvency structure by a State is sacrosanct. States have to pay tribute to keep Caesar’s lights on. Otherwise, there is no grand government plan which can be sustained to serve the plebean hosts.

The other reason is quickly explained by Urban Dictionary’s definition of State’s Rights:

1) A reference to the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

2) A code word that politicians use to signal to racists that they too, are racist. Used in the past to signal that you support segregation and Jim Crow laws.

When Strom Thurmond said he believed in State’s Rights, he really meant that he wanted to keep segregation legal in the South.

If you believe in States’ Rights but want to pass the Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, you are a hypocrite. 

The simple answer is that the racist south abused the 10th Amendment.


Fast forward to 2011, Americans are suffering with not just expensive government but really poorly executed government, with bad policy, resulting in the passage of blatantly unconstitutional laws. These laws don’t serve the long term interests of The People they represent. Corporations hire lawyers, which negotiate PAC service fees to elected officials, legislations are filed and passed; which then return regulatory contracts and business to their corporations. It’s the new normal and the legislative circle of life.

When a bad federal law is passed, State regulatory reforms are then bureaucratically dumped on State leaders desks. They are then expected to robotically comply because “IT’S THE LAW.” Each State negotiates how bad is too bad, weighing federal consequences to its residents.

State leaders had a succession of rude awakenings in 2007.  Federal reforms became completely invasive to citizens once federal wiretapping laws like FISA took anchor, following train with the Patriot Act. Homeland Security started federalizing local police forces and then sought to issue a national ID card to each citizen in 2008.

By 2009, we inaugurated a bi-racial president, but we have significantly less rights as Americans to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Have we lost the forest for the trees?

It is very obvious the federal government is not recovering important Constitutional boundaries, as promised, when Bush left office. In fact, the furrows grow deeper and the power grabbing grows closer to a totalitarian state as Obama seeks to silence whistleblowers, institute a kill switch for the Internet and use federal intelligence to surveil peaceful dissent.

States have to be thinking quietly about the rights of their citizens and aspects of life they once enjoyed without federal intrusion.

Some States are beyond thinking. They’re beyond talking. They are using powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States; [which] are reserved to the States respectively, or to The People.

That’s using the 10th Amendment. When several states use it for similar reasons, it’s called nullification.  I think some citizens of Montana don’t care much what you call it; as long as they don’t get a national ID card or any other federal measure going against the best interest of Montana.

Governor Schweitzer shouldn’t get mired down in owning the term “nullification”.  It’s not like nullification will be an evasive option for Montana in the future.  Someone will always dance to the cheesy piccolo tunes tweeted by the tri-cornered hat constituencies; he doesn’t have to.

I’m sure Montana will accept powerful action over political rhetoric any day.

BTC –  The ALCU of Arizona reports an increase in claims of racial profiling at 2 cases a day trickling in from cities like Peoria, AZ since the passage of SB 1070.  The people being pulled over are not caucasian snowbirds from Ottowa.  They are overwhelmingly people of color with hispanic surnames.

Has the law been enacted?  No. But that hasn’t stopped Arizona from firing teachers with accents and looking the other way as city mural art pieces are defaced as if it were open season on anyone hispanic.

Is there a privacy risk where the driver license information of those detained will be funnelled into a federal immigration database where your information is unprotected? Yes.  Will it happen to you if you are a caucasian concealed weapon carrier in transit? Not likely, UNLESS…. Arizona’s DMV decides to fold all of that information over to DHS and domestic intelligence agencies. Of course, it won’t be about race at that point.


I am so so sick of SB 1070, Arizona, the racists, anti-immigrant people, immigration, the immigrants, the white people “defending” the immigrants, identity theft, database brokering vultures, the 11th grade arrested development and the pitted faces of irresponsible commentators.   Watch the 1st Amendment right to complain unfold in real-time about my Constitutional sea sickness as someone who proudly identifies as both caucasian and Mexican born American.  [WHOOPS!  Sorry 2010 Census – you didn’t have a box for both!]

TRUTH:  I don’t have to pick a side when I am both. Obama should back me on this one, if necessary.

The 10th Amendment  was developed so States could kick out federal affairs in important issues where their services were not wanted or needed.   The 14th Amendment was instated so that people of color and anyone born in the United States had equal rights as human beings.   If your a racist – sit down, have a coke and a smile:  the 10th Amendment is not around so you can abuse the 14th.  If you are a Federalist totalitarian, your going to lose your right to rule if you don’t get moderate and respect a State’s right to set boundaries honoring due process establishing States interests.  Arizona should realize even if the Federal government isn’t moving at the bit rate you want them to, Immigration law is not a right reserved to the States.

I think we’ve all had enough of the posturing and race baiting and the heavy handed gun waving.  Go get some libations and something to eat and catch a great Summer show.  “Immigration” is not getting resolved today. 


Thanks to the people at Twentieth Century FOX we landed an interview with Robert Rodrigugez who plans on releasing the official trailer for MACHETE July 9th. We will be discussing the social commentary component.  No doubt we will probably find intelligent, provacative things to say if you are opposed to interracial marriage.  
Here’s the unnofficial version of the trailer.  How seriously can you take it?

National ID bashing with Cato’s Jim Harper

REAL ID continues its long, slow failure. The federal government’s national ID plans continue to bash against the shoals of state and popular opposition.

Late last month, the governor of Utah signed H.B. 234 into law. The bill prohibits the Utah driver license division from implementing REAL ID. That brings to 25 the number of states rejecting the national ID law, according to the Tenth Amendment Center.

And the State of Nevada, one of the few states that had been working to get in front of REAL ID, is reconsidering. With wait times at Las Vegas DMVs reaching two to four hours, the legislature may soon allow a temporary REAL ID implementation measure signed last year to lapse—this according to the Ely (NV) News.

Congress has attempted to circumvent the growing state opposition to REAL ID with the now-stalled PASS ID legislation. It basically would rename REAL ID so as to nullify the many state resolutions and laws barring implementation of the national ID law because they refer to the May 2005 “REAL ID” law specifically. But PASS ID is the same national ID, it has all the privacy issues of REAL ID, and its costs would be as great or greater than REAL ID.

That doesn’t mean national ID supporters in Congress won’t try to sneak the REAL ID revival bill into law sometime later this year, of course . .

BTC – I encourage subscribers and visitors to please check our national ID wire on the side bar of our page. You can usually catch Jim Harper’s column as early as he posts it. We don’t post-re-post everything because of the wire. However, you can always tell us what you want to see more of [at]

c/o Salt Lake Tribune

UTAH – House committee approved legislation Friday that would prohibit the state from complying with provisions of the federal REAL ID Act, a measure supported by both the American Civil Liberties Union and the Utah Eagle Forum.

“What [REAL ID] could ultimately lead to is a national ID card that could lead to all sorts of government tyranny if it goes too far,” said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem.

The worrisome provisions include the addition of radio frequency chips set into the state’s driver licenses that Sandstrom said “could lead to tracking of movements of individuals and could be used to track the purchases of things such as ammunition and guns.”

Congress passed the REAL ID Act after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to impose uniform standards on state identification cards. The bill would not repeal the portions of the REAL ID Act that have already been enacted, including the requirement that residents provide a birth certificate to get a driver license.

BTC – GUESS WHAT? The 10th Amendment strategy works…. on Real ID… again.

Introduced in the Utah Legislature is House Bill 234 (HB234), which if passed, would prohibit the state from “participating in the implementation of the REAL ID Act of 2005.”

Real ID created national standards for driver’s license and identification cards and opponents have been resisting it for various reasons – it’s a privacy risk, forces states to bear the financial burden, and is not authorized by the constitution.

HB234 addresses much of this:

The Legislature finds that the United States Congress’ enactment of the REAL ID Act into law:

(a) is inimical to the security and well-being of the people of this state;
(b) will cause unneeded expense and inconvenience to the people of this state; and
(c) was adopted in violation of the principles of federalism contained in the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Utah legislature passed House Resolution 4 (HR4) in 2009, which was a non-binding resolution making clear that the legislature opposed the law. Supporters of HB234 see it as a logical follow-up to the resolution passed last year.

States were originally given until May 2008 to comply with the law, but widespread resistance resulted in the Federal Government changing that deadline not once, not twice, but three times.

More than two dozen states have passed resolutions or binding laws opposition the act, rendering the Bush-era law nearly null and void in practice.

CLICK HERE – to view all current Real ID nullification legislation

Michael Boldin is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center. He was raised in Milwaukee, WI, and currently resides in Los Angeles, CA.

A BTC Exclusive

NEWSFLASH – Mainstream, alt-news makers and pundits use a common polarizing tactic known as spin every day. Spin defined for us usually is clearly polemicized reporting from a blogger taking shots at a political stance or action. It’s a line or two at the bottom of some copy. It could be a graph to cast a negative and sundry light on those who espouse an undesired perspective.

Taking any political stand is tough. However, the consistent stand of this snarky blogger is that no form or manifest fashion of anything Real ID should be allowed to move forward without putting a hole in it.

Real ID, if implemented as designed today, would come crushing down on the average American individual for not having the right legal identity tender to do things like travel or enter federal buildings. There has also been significant coverage about the loss and complication of citizens’ privacy from data consolidation, biometrics and RFID tag use.

Lately certain news cretins, left leaning obviates, have gone subtle. What I have observed this week is AlterNet and NPR picking up Real ID and dusting it off in a favorable light. The news voice in support of Real ID in the past has always come from editorial page sledgehammers like Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) himself. This is a strange development after our witness history of support from the social justice NGOs, mostly Democratic and many many federal congressional Democrats sympathetic to public grief over Real ID.

NPR really surprised me with a rather disgusting display of irregular pandering to neo-con defense interests citing that a clause in the Real ID Act was passed to disallow terrorists on US soil.

So far, these rulings have not resulted in detainees’ being released in the United States. But that is only because, at present, the detainees are physically kept outside of the country. In the 2005 Real ID Act, Congress barred aliens who either have been members of terrorist organizations or have received paramilitary training in terrorist camps from entering our nation. Though one judge has tried to order detainees released here regardless, his order was reversed on appeal. Other judges have been hesitant to hold that their power to review detention rulings implies a power to order detainees released, much less released in the United States, in defiance of statutory proscription.


My thoughts immediately jumped to the sheer stupidity and ludicrousness that ANY terrorist, obviously present for the causes of terrorism, would be allowed to be here for, any reason, legally- EVER. Between the FBI, the CIA, the DHS and any other public agency [who may or may not be off the pay-to-fail program] looped into the events leading to 9-11 attacks, there was easily enough intel to root out the terrorists. They simply didn’t heed the call to competence. Real ID doesn’t fix that issue with our government.


Where does NPR’s motivation to report this misinformation come from? The public funds this media, right? Not all the time. The rest of the time it’s the MacArthur Foundation and other Council on Foreign Relations regulars who play patsy to neo-con interests from time to time when it starts to look like the United States is not the manageable, cohesive group which will foster their corporate or globalized interests. FUN FACT: Dick Cheney was once a Director of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Under the subheader, Next They’ll Put a Chip in Your Brain, AlterNet made sure to single out an African American Tea Party member paying negative tribute to his awareness of the incorporation of RFID technology in licenses. They also made sure to illustrate, Nate of the LA Tea Party, wasn’t doing enough for the black race and that he’s clearly guilty of being an Obama apostate. While RFID does have disastrous implications if allowed to move forward without certain vigilance, AlterNet’s bloggers won’t be there to insure you if there’s a massive digital invasion of your life personally. They can go ahead and take shots at the easy targets [Christian “Teabaggers”] because it’s fun to hate. Kool-Aide, anyone?
While AlterNet can get away with making Tea Party people look bad, they are not getting away with a cheap attempt to humiliate away the proliferation of a database state agenda. Alarm over RFID proliferation is simply a sensational head at the top of a monstrous digital privacy boil. A really nasty boil, I might add, that many privacy, technology and civil liberty groups spend their days lancing by outing complicit corporations. The root? Public-private dealmaking over otherwise illegal intel gathering. Americans are being led unwillingly down the inequitable slope where corporations and certain sectors of government feed each others avarice for information, power and of course, money.
So what does this have to do with you? You are present on planet earth so Corporate vampires can make money off of you. Anything else is some sort of weird blasphemy to the likes of Yahoo!, Google, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, AAMVA, Choicepoint, Lexus Nexis, and any other business that will sell your information for cash.

I’ll go as far as saying that Democrats who don’t find problems with extended surveillance agendas plaguing the US have said, often directly, they have had their identity stolen – what more can they do to us with this license or database agenda?

I have to think about what they might really want. They want security in their government. They want protection from terrorists. Somewhere in the Democratic brain, where government is always the best path to problem solving, they may have said – unfunded mandate bad, extra surveillance as a compromise- OK! Which is why the Supermajority might continue to greenlight the PATRIOT Act and subsequent FISA agendas.

Moderate and even extreme left can understand when an agenda could lead to totalitarian behavior, but they often are not as sensitized at times to how that plays out in America. This is, unfortunately, in stark contrast to millions of Americans who are in between and outside of this 2 party system. There has been a general lack of sensitivity over issues made certain are problematic for civil liberty with the ’06 crop of Democrats. They were not necessarily the first to see what was wrong with the Real ID Act until a bunch of Republicans snuck it in without asking them first. Then it was: “How dare you ask for money!! That’s an unfunded mandate!!”

That was until 36 states and almost 5 years later the federal government was told to go pound sand until they can get the plan for average American identity right.


What the American people are left with is another food fight, but this time to save face over what was obviously a bad idea as the Real ID Act. Real ID has become a herald of 10th Amendment actions – nullification. States might think Real ID looks okay but they just couldn’t get the nasty taste out of their mouth, no matter the incentive.

Real ID is headed for a repeal. No matter what they throw at the likes of me or anyone who defends themselves from individual intrusion it won’t ever make Real ID a good and decent law for the benefit of the people.
You simply can’t polish a turd.

Gov. Sanford Updates Sec. Napolitano on REAL ID
Letter to Janet Napolitano 11.30.09.pdf [134 KB]

Columbia, S.C. – December 4, 2009 – In a letter sent earlier this week, Gov. Mark Sanford both updated Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on South Carolina’s progress in making the state’s driver’s licenses more secure, and reiterated the administration’s strong concerns that the federal REAL ID law represents both an infringement on constitutional liberties and an unacceptable cost burden to the states.

“South Carolina continues to make strides toward protecting the personal information contained in our driver’s licenses, including technological advances that enhance security and guard against fraud and ID theft,” said Gov. Mark Sanford. “Given that our state’s driver’s licenses continue to be among the most secure in the nation, we remain skeptical of claims that REAL ID or PASS ID is the safest and wisest route for our state and country. While attempts to contain some of the costs associated with REAL ID in the recently amended legislation are commendable, this federal mandate still infringes on liberty and privacy rights, and in this case, discretion and caution indeed seem the better part of valor. So for that reason, and for the fact that our state law currently prevents South Carolina from complying with REAL ID, we will continue to stand out from under this unfunded federal mandate.”

In March of 2008, Gov. Sanford refused to apply for an extension of the federally imposed deadline on compliance with REAL ID – in effect forcing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to issue an assurance that South Carolinians would not be penalized during travel or when visiting federal buildings. Gov. Sanford argued that the South Carolina DMV had already met 90 percent of REAL ID’s benchmarks; that the legislation had never been properly debated in Congress; that the law represented a $9 billion unfunded mandate; and – most importantly – that REAL ID presented serious threats to individual liberty.

In July of this year, Gov. Sanford again raised concerns about PASS ID, the legislatively-revised REAL ID, and specifically questioned whether secondary levels of screening would be mandated, and whether the new bill’s voluntary pilot program establishing a centralized hub of citizens’ identities would in time become mandatory. To date, these concerns have not been addressed.

We dedicate this blog entry to friends in free living, Steve Fox and my other friend Alexis Baden Mayer. You won a victory today.

10th Amendment Center

Bryce Shonka & AP’s Devlin Barrett [ We *heart* Devlin.]

Today we have another victory to celebrate. As reported in the Washington Times, Federal Marijuana policy is quietly going the way of REAL ID. Some studies have shown that 75% of all prisoners incarcerated for drug charges were locked up for Marijuana alone, making this policy retreat not simply about cannabis, but the unconstitutional Federal drug war as a whole.

Regardless of your personal view of Marijuana use, this news should make us all feel a little more free today, knowing that decisions about such things as owning a particular plant are once again in the hands of our state houses and not a bunch of bureaucrats in DC.
I myself feel a sense of gratitude for all of those in California, Vermont and other states who have had the courage to stand up to the unconstitutional policies of DC. Their bold resistance made this victory for all of us possible.

There’s a growing movement on the part of states to override federal laws and regulations under the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers to the states not delegated to the federal government. So far, the battle lines have been drawn at Real ID, medical marijuana and firearms, but federally mandated health insurance may not be far behind.

State sovereignty resolutions were introduced in 37 states this year; seven passed. Although the resolutions are not legally binding, Tenth Amendment Center founder Michael Boldin said they “serve notice” that states will no longer automatically enforce federal mandates in areas they believe the central government has no constitutional authority.

Montana’s first-in-the-nation law reasserting state authority with the regulation of firearms manufactured and sold within state boundaries was soon followed by a similar law in Tennessee. Officials from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives have already sent letters to gun dealers and federal permit holders in both states telling them to ignore the state law. A court battle is next.

Nearly 20 other states have similar legislation in the works, including directives to their governors to order National Guard troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. Next year, Arizona will have a state constitutional amendment on the ballot that allows residents to opt out of any national health care program.

“The federal government doesn’t rule to limit its own power very often. I don’t think going to court and trying to litigate is the best way to put the federal government in a constitutional box,” Boldin said, pointing out that popular resistance to the hated Stamp Act led by Revolutionary War heroes Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry “effectively nullified the law.” The same thing happened with the Real ID Act, which many states refused to enforce. “The feds had to back off three times,” Boldin said.

State sovereignty supporters stand on solid historical ground. James Madison’s “Virginia Plan,” which would have given Congress veto power with state laws and allowed the federal judiciary to hear all disputes, was soundly defeated by the signers of the Constitution. A needed check on an overreaching federal government that grows bigger by the day, the reassertion of state sovereignty should be a welcome development to Americans concerned about losing their liberties — just like the Founders were.