Posts tagged Founding Fathers
State legislatures have begun to decriminalize marijuana. This is very important, even if you don’t support marijuana use, personally. This issue goes beyond simple decriminalization of marijuana because it is not only about the freedom to make your own choices as to what you eat, drink or smoke, it is about liberty and the return to true constitutional governance. The result of the States’ refusal to accept unconstitutional federal over reach has positive implications on the future of Liberty and governance, which the Founders always intended to reside in the States.
The Federal Government has never had the authority to ban marijuana within the states. The clearest evidence of this is the simple fact that it took an amendment to the Constitution, (the 18th ) to prohibit alcohol and another amendment,(the 21st) to repeal the alcohol prohibition. To date there have been no such amendment to prohibit marijuana.
To further support my argument, The 10th Amendment to the Constitution states, “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.” This means that any prohibition, regulation or other law regarding marijuana is left to each state to enact, by means of their legislative process supported by the citizens of that state.
What we have instead, is decades of unconstitutional federal “Law” and regulation that has gone unchecked because of the misrepresentation of the Supremacy Clause by the courts. The Supremacy Clause has been used as an argument against nullification. The Supremacy Clause states “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof…shall be the supreme Law of the Land” The power lies within the states, by way of the elected legislature to determine if a law is pursuant to the Constitution. On the other hand, if the law is indeed unconstitutional, nullification is not only justified, but the duty of the individual states to ignore.
Nullification under the Doctrine of Interposition is the rightful remedy for unconstitutional Federal “Laws” as clearly intended and argued by Thomas Jefferson.
“…but where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that without this right they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them”
Let’s be clear, nullification is not an act whereby a state simply refuses to comply with a Federal law it does not like, it is the claim that the law is not a law at all because it is unconstitutional.
Individual States all over the US are currently exercising this right by considering a number of legislative actions that would nullify illegal, unconstitutional Federal “laws” such as obamacare, any federal firearms ban, registration or limitations, and the prohibition of marijuana. The debate is not simply about marijuana legalization; it is a debate whether or not to return our country to true Constitutional governance.
In an effort to address this issue, I am proposing a number of Nullification bills the bill pertaining to Marijuana is entitled the”cannabisfreedom2014
There is a great cry from many well intentioned citizens to petition to referendum, SB281. Although well intentioned, this would be the wrong thing to do.
Maryland stands at a crossroads of an epic issue. Will we govern as a Constitutional Republic or simply a hyper-democracy? Unfortunately, the mere act of taking SB281 to referendun would send the wrong message. It would suggest Constitutional rights are subject to elimination at the whims of a simple majority… and it would fuel the ambitions of democratic majorities to continue their attacks on our freedoms.
We must not and cannot give any semblance of authority to an “unconstitutional act” or “pretended legislation” disguised as “law”. Taking SB281 to referendum would do exactly that.
Consider the implication if voters were to support SB281. A constitutionally protected right would be forever lost, and by “buying in” to a referendum process, we would be implicitly endorsing and condoning the misconception that our unalienable rights are subject to majority vote. This is unacceptable, because in a Constitutional Republic, THE MAJORITY HAS NO AUTHORITY TO TAKE AWAY GOD GIVEN CONSTITUIONAL RIGHTS FROM THE MINORITY .
We must never send the message that our God-given constitutional rights are subject to popular vote.
Some may ask, “If not referendum than what?”
We will be holding a series of meetings with distinguished leaders, officials, industry experts, scholars, activists, and constitutional attorneys to propose details of alternate actions designed to (a) restore our Second Amendment Protections; and (b) motivate and organize the sovereigns in Maryland (the people) to reaffirm our government’s commitment to the Constitution.
Thomas Jefferson said. “What county can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance.”
Therefore, we the undersigned will not encourage, promote, or participate in any referendum of SB281.
Delegate Don Dwyer, Jr.
Comissioner Richard Rothschild
More to come…..
Press Release: Citizen Delivers over 20,000 Pages of Testimony in Opposition to O’Mallys Gun Grabbing Agenda
Today, Delegate Don Dwyer received and delivered to the House Judiciary Committee, about 20 thousand sheets of written testimony submitted by Mr. Mike Endzel of Easton on behalf of citizens opposing the many gun ban bills being heard on Friday March 1st, including HB 294 the Governor’s so called “Firearms Safety Act”
Mr. Endzel and Chris Dingler created a website www.nationalbands.com to provide a venue for people who are not able to come to Annapolis in person, to submit written testimony for what has become a galvanizing issue for many Marylanders.
Mr. Endzel had not previously participated in the Legislative process, but was moved to do so because of this issue and had come to Annapolis on February 6 along with close to 4,000 other citizens. He said that his inspiration for the idea came after he stood in line to sign up to testify for over 5 hours but in the end was not afforded the opportunity to speak. Mr. Endzel said that he received emails from disabled veterans who stated that they would not be physically capable of coming to Annapolis to testify in person, thanking him for providing a means to have their voice heard. Mr. Endzel committed to printing the required 70 copies at his own cost and delivering the testimonies to Delegate Dwyer.
“I think it is a wonderful thing he has done. The Legislature has never before seen the amount of emails, phone calls and people out in opposition to these “gun control” bills. I commend Mike for what he has done to help give people a voice in the process.” Said Delegate Dwyer
Many Marylanders’ (mainly staunch conservatives) have expressed to me their belief that there is no reason to stay in Maryland. This attitude permeates from a conviction that the politicians have ceased to care about the voters. They have come to feel that the hope of ever having politicians adhere to the Constitution is long gone.
Unfortunately, many elected officials do not even understand the basic rights of Marylanders’ as granted in the State Constitution. Worse yet, they pass legislation that directly violates citizens’ rights and freedoms. In some cases, this is simply because of ignorance; in other cases it is intentional with no regard for the Constitution.
All elected officials take an Oath of Office to uphold and defend the State and U.S. Constitutions. Sadly most have no idea what an Oath is. Many voters and elected officials alike are confused in their understanding of the Oath of Office, believing that the Oath is made to the people, as a promise to legislate wisely and justly.
The Oath that I took, when I was sworn in as a State Delegate each term is as follows:
I, Don Dwyer, Jr. do swear and affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States; and that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland, and support the Constitution and Laws thereof; and that I will, to the best of my skill and judgment, diligently and faithfully, without partiality or prejudice, execute the office of State Delegate according to the Constitution and Laws of this State, that I will not directly or indirectly, receive the profits or any part of the profits of any other office during the term of my acting as Delegate.
Webster’s Dictionary (1828) defines an Oath:
A solemn affirmation or declaration, made with an appeal to God for the truth of what is affirmed. The appeal to God in an oath implies that the person imprecates his vengeance and renounces his favor if the declaration is false, or if the declaration is a promise, the person invokes the vengeance of God if he should fail to fulfill it. A false oath is called perjury.
The Oath of Office is a declaration to God, that the words in the oath be true. The oath is an affirmation to be held accountable by God, should the Oath be broken.
In order that the rights of all Maryland Citizens may be protected in the future, I am introducing legislation that will require that every elected official in the state, take a limited class prior to being sworn in, that covers;
A) Upholding the Oath of office.
B) A primer on the Maryland Declaration of Rights.
C) A primer on the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights.
Encourage your elected representatives to support this legislation and to defend your rights under the State Constitution.