Just in from TenthAmendmentCenter.com:
The Oklahoma State Senate has passed Charles Key’s House Concurrent Resolution 1028 (HCR1028) today.
Introduced on April 29, 2009, HCR1028 is “A Concurrent Resolution claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or repealed; and directing distribution.”
The resolution, which passed the House 73-22 on May 4th, does not require a signature from the Governor.
Congratulations, you Okies. Now it’s time for more States to follow suit.
On May 11, 2009, the Louisiana State Senate voted unanimously in support of Senate Concurrent Resolution 2 (SCR2), which “Memorializes Congress to affirm Louisiana’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America and to demand that the federal government halt its practices of assuming powers and imposing mandates upon the states for purposes not enumerated by the Constitution of the United States of America.”
The resolution, introduced by Senator Crowe, passed 32-0, and was received by the Louisiana House on 05-12-09.
From a concerned citizen involved with tea parties, Ohio is showing movement on the Tenth Amendment front…
There is positive movement on Ohio’s State Sovereignty legislation!
Today a concurrent resolution was introduced in the Ohio State Senate.
S.C.R. 13 was put forth as the senate’s version of the state
sovereignty resolution. Among its cosponsors is our very own Steve
Buehrer, who along with five other senators signed on in support of
the resolution introduced by Senators Grendell and Faber. Make sure
you take a moment to thank Mr. Buehrer for his work in support of our
state’s sovereignty. Here is his contact information:
Room #134, First Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215
The full text of the S.C.R. 13 is available here:
Also, the House version of the resolution, H.C.R. 11, is scheduled for
a hearing before the State Government Committee next Wednesday, May 13
at 2:30pm. There is currently no public testimony allowed, but that
may change before the hearing. Either way, if you have not already
done so please contact the members of this committee urging them to
support the measure. The Ohio Freedom Alliance provides a service
that allows you to email the Speaker of the House and the committee
members quickly and efficiently. You can do so here:
Introduced in the South Carolina State Senate on May 6, 2009, the “Firearms Freedom Act” (s-794) seeks “to provide that a firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured and retained in South Carolina is exempt from federal regulation under the commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States.”
The bill is sponsored by South Carolina State Senators Bright, Bryant, Mulvaney, Davis, Shoopman, S. Martin and McConnell. They join Montana, Utah, and Texas in an effort to limit federal regulation of guns, and specifically invoke the 9th and 10th Amendments as restrictions on federal power:
“the regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the ninth and tenth amendments to the United States Constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition”
The right to bear arms is famously and specifically referenced in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Alas, for advocates of the right, the language of the amendment gets tangled up in the regulating of militias and the interpretation of commas. Now a multistate movement is trying to find more robust constitutional support in another amendment, which makes no mention of weaponry at all.
The 10th Amendment declares, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” It inspired the so-called Sagebrush Rebellion that swept the West three decades ago, preventing the federal takeover of public lands pushed by the Carter Administration and propelling the self-proclaimed Sagebrush Rebel, Ronald Reagan, to the presidency. Now the Amendment is being invoked by pro-gun advocates to press for state, rather than federal, regulation of gun manufacturers. (See pictures of America’s gun culture.)
“It is part of the populist state-sovereignty movement, the sense there is so much power in Washington,” says Stephen P. Halbrook, a Virginia attorney who has argued several important Second Amendment cases before the Supreme Court, including, most recently, a successful case overturning the Washington, D.C., gun ban. Halbrook says the Montana initiative had been simmering long before President Obama’s election, which led to reports of a run on gun and ammunition across the country because of fear of new federal curtailment or taxation of gun ownership. “It is a grass-roots thing,” Halbrook says, “not an NRA [National Rifle Association] initiative.” The NRA, however, has expressed its support for the measure.
A current listing of State-based initiatives can be found here.