|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Order Jamie Glazov’s new book, ‘United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny, Terror, and Hamas’: HERE.
“What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun,” King Solomon famously observed in the Koheleth (Book of Ecclesiastes). Truer words have never been written. Look no further than the present anarchic tumult in Minnesota.
On Jan. 12, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison initiated a lawsuit on behalf of the North Star State, along with municipal co-plaintiffs Minneapolis and St. Paul, against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Todd Lyons and the rest of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement apparatus. In his press conference announcing the suit, Ellison emphasized the same basic arguments as his formal complaint: Namely, that ICE’s enforcement “surge” in Minnesota amounts to a “violation of the Tenth Amendment and the sovereign laws and powers granted to states.”
In essence, Ellison and his Minnesota’s Democratic Party leadership confreres argue that the constitutional federalism articulated in the Tenth Amendment and its corollary of “states’ rights” can shield the Land of 10,000 Lakes from the long enforcement arm of federal immigration law. Ellison and Minnesota Democrats claim that by declaring their state and cities to be illegal alien “sanctuaries,” they can “nullify” federal immigration law. Stop me if you’ve heard that one before.
Democrats in America have a long and inglorious history of invoking “states’ rights” and shirking federal law. It has never ended well.
In 1798 and 1799, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison — members of the Democratic-Republican Party, the partisan predecessor to today’s Democratic Party — penned the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. The Resolutions, a direct response to the controversial Alien and Sedition Acts championed by President John Adams, argued that when Congress passes an unconstitutional statute, the states are permitted to declare the law null and void within their own jurisdictions. According to this argument, if a state’s constitutional officers deem a federal law to be unconstitutional, the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the Constitution — which normally establishes federal law as “the supreme law of the land” over state law — simply does not apply.
This sentiment was taken to its logical conclusion during the antebellum period. During the nullification crisis of 1832-33, South Carolina passed the Ordinance of Nullification, declaring the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 to be unconstitutional and unenforceable in the Palmetto State. South Carolina even took initial steps to organize the militia, in anticipation of attempted federal mobilization. In ensuing decades, South Carolinian John C. Calhoun emerged as the most passionate advocate for state nullification. Calhoun argued not only for a state’s “right” to nullify federal law but also to secede from the Union, if necessary, to secure its sovereignty. The result was the 1861 attack on Fort Sumter and the 600,000-plus slain in the Civil War.
For nearly a century after the Civil War, Calhoun’s ghost lingered. As the civil rights movement gained steam, segregationists invoked nullification and “states’ rights” as justifications for defying federally mandated civil rights. The Southern Manifesto, signed by dozens of U.S. senators and congressmen in 1956, took the position that the Tenth Amendment permitted states to defy the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education desegregation decision of 1954. In the Little Rock Crisis of 1957, Gov. Orval Faubus relied on the same principles when he ordered the Arkansas National Guard to block Black students from attending Little Rock Central High School. Faubus lost his showdown when President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent in the 101st Airborne Division to forcibly desegregate Little Rock.
In echoing the discredited theories of yesteryear, Ellison, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and the rest of the state’s top Democratic brass have emerged as modern reincarnations of Jefferson Davis and George Wallace. They wouldn’t see it that way, naturally. Nor would Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recognize that her own “race-infused worldview” and belief in “racial determinism,” as Justice Clarence Thomas accused her of harboring in his Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023) concurrence, is an updated version of Calhoun’s vile life outlook. But that’s precisely what it is.
On Thursday, Trump border czar Tom Homan announced that the administration is prepared to draw down federal personnel in Minnesota if the state cooperates. We’ll see if that transpires, but I have my suspicions. Historically, Democratic Party subversives and insurrectionists have not been known for their cooperation with the feds. The good news for President Donald Trump is that he has a clear legal precedent for how to respond, if the neo-Confederate uprising in Minnesota continues apace. On April 15, 1861, in response to the attack on Fort Sumter three days prior, President Abraham Lincoln invoked the Insurrection Act of 1807. Trump has recently been musing about doing the same.
Will Trump pull the trigger? Maybe. After all, there’s nothing new under the sun.
Minnesota need a whole new leadership then the Scum Balls running it night now all those sheltering Criminals should be changed with Aiding and Abetting as w ell as Giving Aid and Comfort to the enemy and give them all Life in Prison and even Longer
How about death with the possibility of parole?
The first civil war happened because the Dem southerners would not give up their slaves
The second civil war happened because the radical Dens will not give up their migrants
Trump will need to make an example of Minnesota and stamp this insurrection out before it spreads to every Blue State
He’ll need to put Minneapolis under siege and arrest both Waltz and Frey –
He’ll need to send in the NG and the Marines if necessary and suspend Minnesota’s statehood , thereby nullifying 2 senators and a number of Reps
The fire of civil war needs to be contained in Minneapolis
Good summary, but we can’t dismiss Thomas Jefferson and James Madison (main authors of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution) as belonging to the same team as today’s insurrectionists. Federalism is a foundation of freedom in the U.S., and secession should really be a possible option if a state cannot function within the Union.
Do we want a Democrat Federal Govt. suppressing the freedoms of right-wing states?
It’s the rise of the New Idiocracy. These self-important fools would lead the country to ruin if left to their own devices. That must not happen. But Trump told the Iranian patriots that “Help is on the way!” and it never arrived, allowing 50,000+ people to be murdered by the regime in the last 30 days.
For some unknown reason, Trump talks the Big Talk, but doesn’t follow through. His behavior has cost the republicans the November midterm election which will make trump a very lame duck. Very little has been made into law. Most of what Trump did will be undone with the next president. But isn’t it interesting that after Trump leaves office, he’ll have a shiny 747 to fly around in, a ‘gift’ from Qatar? Isn’t it interesting that Trump and his boys will have mega-deals in Muslim lands, making them very, very rich? And isn’t it interesting how the Qataris and Saudis have ‘invested’ so heavily in Trumps digital coin offerings? All their ‘investments’ do beg some questions……. why did Trump force Israel to lose the war to Hamas and why did Trump ‘decide’ to leave the regime in place? Looks like that shiny 747 had very sticky strings attached to it…
I think we forget that the Supremacy Clause gives the Federal Government “supreme” power ONLY when it is used IN PURSUANCE of the Constitution. According to those who focus on the 10th Amendment, nullification IS an option when the Feds go against the Constitution. How that manifests it always tricky, That being said, Immigration HAS BEEN shown to be a FEDERAL ISSUE so the Feds DO have final say in how immigration works and states CANNOT simply “nullify” those rules/laws because they don’t like them. Of course, the Feds DO NOT have the authority to IGNORE or Change without proper procedures those same immigration laws (executive order are NOT the Constitutional avenue but have been used anyway), so it actually it is the Federal Government that has caused this problem we have now. Congress is either unaware, stupid, or in on it, and the American people are ignorant so DC gets away with unconstitutional things every day. What “sanctuary” states and cities are doing in this case IS completely wrong AND unconstitutional, but then I would never expect a Democrat to know what the Constitution says unless it fits his need at the time, and even then he is probably twisting the words for his own benefit.
Looking and thinking about those pictured at the beginning of this fine article it’s almost like a trio of trilobites have run roughshod over the land of 10000 lakes. Once their state goes down the drain at least they have a major river that they can raft on when they’re told to leave. That event can’t come soon enough.
Dems are so desperate for voters they will not give up buying their migrants and criminals with welfare and food stamps.