Gun Control

More Than A Dozen States Are Trying To Nullify Federal Gun Control

Conservative state legislators are taking a page from the playbook of pro-immigration activists and the marijuana legalization movement.

|

HD Download

With President Joe Biden issuing a flurry of executive actions last week to strengthen federal gun laws, state representatives across the country are working in the opposite direction, taking a page from the playbook of immigration activists by advancing legislation that would make their enforcement illegal. On April 6, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey, a Republican, signed the first gun control nullification bill into law.

"Nullifying unconstitutional, federal laws is both legal and it's also the right thing to do," says Anthony Sabatini, a Republican lawmaker and member of the Florida House of Representatives. "It's silly to sit around and wait for something you know is unconstitutional," he tells Reason. "It's time to stand up and fight back. And the methods that we need to use are the ones already being used by the left."

In 1987, Oregon passed a law prohibiting state and local law enforcement from using public resources to arrest or detain people whose only crime was being in the country illegally. Since then, hundreds of other jurisdictions have passed similar laws, becoming so-called sanctuary cities.

Conservative activists are employing the same strategy. While Arizona is the only state where such a bill has become law, elected officials have introduced similar bills in more than a dozen statehouses. Montana's legislature has approved a bill that is now awaiting signature or veto from the governor; the Arkansas Senate and the Missouri, South Carolina, and West Virginia houses have each passed such bills; committees in Texas, Alabama, and New Hampshire have bills that are moving forward in their state legislatures; and similar bills have been introduced in Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Minnesota, Ohio, Nebraska, Iowa, and Louisiana.

"We know this stuff has been working and the right can continue to complain about the things that the left is successful at, or they can look at it, learn from it, and replicate it," Michael Boldin, the founder and executive director of the Tenth Amendment Center, tells Reason.

Sabatini is cosponsoring a bill in Florida called the "Second Amendment Preservation Act" that would prohibit any employee of the state of Florida from enforcing, or attempting to enforce "any federal act, law, executive order, administrative order, court order, rule, regulation, statute, or ordinance infringing on the right to keep and bear arms ensured by the Second Amendment." The bill says that any state employee who assists in enforcing federal gun control laws would be terminated and never again be allowed to work for the state of Florida.

Defying federal law is something that a majority of states already do in one way or another, by becoming immigration sanctuaries or through the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana and other drugs that federal law still deems illegal.

"In terms of the method it's identical," says Sabatini. In sanctuary cities, "they stopped reporting to or dealing with I.C.E., and that's basically what we're doing."

Boldin says that if states refuse to cooperate with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), then federal gun control becomes difficult to enforce.

"The ATF only has about 5,500 employees for the whole country. About a third of them are in administration, and that means they don't have the manpower or resources to enforce federal gun control on their own," he says. "Their maximum capacity, year in and year out, is between 8,000 to 10,000 closed cases. So if you get a combination of more than 10,000 people violating a federal act, and then on top of it, you have states and local communities refusing to participate in enforcement. You've then opened the door to actually nullify that federal act in practice and effect."

Boldin says that the legal case for nullification doesn't depend on the constitutionality of the law a state wants to nullify thanks to a legal doctrine known as anti-commandeering, which has been upheld in five Supreme Court cases from 1842 to 2018. It holds that the federal government can't require states and localities to participate in the enforcement of federal laws.

"Talking about constitutionality actually does kind of get in the way of anti-commandeering," Boldin notes. "A lot of people like that as a line in the sand. And I think that's a good approach, but I don't think they should be helping enforce federal gun control. Even if a federal court says this federal gun measure is 'constitutional.'"

In March 2018, when the Trump administration was fighting with local officials over the enforcement of federal immigration laws, John Bolton, who would be appointed by then–President Donald Trump as national security adviser the following month, challenged the concept of nullification in an interview with Breitbart News Daily.

"The idea that law enforcement at lower levels shouldn't be required to cooperate with the feds is just unthinkable," he told SiriusXM host Alex Marlow. "That was also proposed by South Carolina Sen. John C. Calhoun before the Civil War, to say that South Carolina and other slave states would not enforce federal law regarding slavery."

Boldin says that argument is ahistorical. Anti-commandeering originated in the 1842 Supreme Court case Prigg v. Pennsylvania, which upheld the state's right not to participate in enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. "The bottom line is nullification, as a tool banning participation in federal enforcement was actually a tool of the anti-slavery abolitionist North," Boldin argues. "And when South Carolina seceded…they issued a document to explain their rationale. And they specifically cited Northern nullification of the federal Fugitive Slave Act."

Sabatini says his bill is popular among Florida voters, but that doesn't mean it's likely to pass. In other states, law enforcement groups like the Missouri Sheriffs' Association have worked to prevent gun control nullification bills from passing or to change their language, rendering them toothless.

Boldin says police departments want to continue enforcing federal law because it's lucrative. "They get all kinds of funding from the joint task forces, through things like the Department of Homeland security grant, the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant…They get civil asset forfeiture…I don't think they'll admit that they're getting a bunch of loot to do this federal enforcement, but they certainly are."

Boldin says that for the nullification movement to succeed against gun control laws and beyond, more Americans will have to recognize that the most effective way to oppose federal policies that violate their rights is at the local level.

"The whole idea of federalism is so important because it's the only way you can have a country with a few hundred million people living together with a wide range of social, economic, political viewpoints together in peace. What's right for people in California is probably not right for people in South Carolina and vice versa. And when we see things that come down from a one-size-fits-all centralized solution, I don't think anyone really ever gets what they want."

Because 36 states have nullified federal marijuana prohibition, Boldin argues, there's mounting pressure for the federal government to follow suit. "I think we can replicate that on other issues and learn that localism is really the way forward for liberty."

Produced by John Osterhoudt, additional camera by Zach Weissmueller, color correction by Regan Taylor, additional graphics by Isaac Reese

Photos: Alex Milan Tracy/Sipa USA/Newscom; Nicole Neri/Reuters/Newscom; The Mises Institute; Jeff Malet Photography/Newscom.

NEXT: Chef Andrew Gruel on Capitalism, Cuisine, and Calling Gov. Gavin Newsom an Asshole

HD Download

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The ATF only has about 5,500 employees for the whole country. About a third of them are in administration, and that means they don’t have the manpower or resources to enforce federal gun control on their own,”

    Well then fellow citizens, I guess it is on us to go door to door to politely disarm the citizenry. If they refuse, we may have to cast insults and accusations to make them comply! We will call them a racist, a bigot, or a climate denier. This will shame them into giving up those evil firearms.
    BTW, who wants to volunteer to go to the progressive run ghettos and disarm them?

    1. Well, it turns out that ATF Agents are Infrastructure. Look for another half trillion to hire an additional 10,000 unionized agents to grab military style weapins of mass war

      1. What “military style weapins (sic) of war? Can you be more specific?

        1. Your sarcasm meter: you should tap it, make sure it’s still working.

          1. JOB FOR USA Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much dffdf better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
            on this page…..VISIT HERE

        2. He was being facetious.

          1. I am creating an honest wage from home 3000 Dollars/week , that is wonderful, below a year agone i used to be unemployed during a atrocious economy.AMs I convey God on a daily basis i used to be endowed these directions and currently it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with everybody,
            Here is I started Copy This Link For Full Detail……….. Home Profit System

        3. I’ve got this yard full of rocks.

      2. The secret service is desperately seeking investigative agents too. weird.

    2. Single Mom With 4 Kids Lost Her Job But Was Able To Stay On Top By Banking Continuously $1500 Per Week kss ​With An Online Work She Found Over The Internet… Check The Details HERE…. Visit the given link……….. Visit Here<b

    3. I am creating an honest wage from home 1900 Dollars/week , that is wonderful, below a year gone i used to be unemployed during an atrocious economy. I convey God on a daily basis. I used to be endowed witxcxcxch these directions and currently it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with everybody,

      Here is where I started……….Visit Here

  2. “The whole idea of federalism is so important because it’s the only way you can have a country with a few hundred million people living together with a wide range of social, economic, political viewpoints together in peace.

    It will either be that, totalitarianism, or dissolution. I personally thing the first choice is highly preferable to the others.

    1. I’m already *in* Texas so #3 is alright in theory.

  3. The ATF only has about 5,500 employees for the whole country. About a third of them are in administration, and that means they don’t have the manpower or resources to enforce federal gun control on their own,”

    All the more reason for Biden to enlarge the ATF or put the military under their command

    1. There are over 20 million veterans who won’t let that happen.

      1. Nor will the non-woke members of the military. They are the shooters in combat arms and Special operations. The woke tend to stick with desk jobs. See, fat, racist, bastard, Lloyd Austin.

  4. John Bolton: ‘”The idea that law enforcement at lower levels shouldn’t be required to cooperate with the feds is just unthinkable…”‘

    I guess he was absent the day in class when they explained “Federalism.”

    1. He may just have trouble thinking, like so many others. Or maybe he thinks that sort of thinking isn’t allowed.

      1. Or, he is just an ass?

        1. Bolton, ass, potato, patato.

    2. The FBI gives a class to law enforcement about this very subject. They show the movie version where the feds show up and say, “we will take over from here, stand down”. Then they teach reality.

      1. Or they just create a new agency, as they did during prohibition, due to some States and local governments refusing to enforce it (Maryland and New York come to mind.)

        But either way, creating headaches for the Feds can be a worthwhile endeavor.

        1. They don’t need to conscript state police, when they can conscript banks and other businesses to render non-compliant people ‘unpersons’.

          Once the government finds out you still have a gun they ordered you to turn in, your bank accounts are frozen, you can’t fly, your house gets repossessed because the mortgage payment didn’t clear.

          That’s the real threat, IMO.

          1. Yes, to counter that threat, many people emptied their bank accounts and 401k before the Covid/election and bought massive collections of now ultra valuable guns and ammo.

      2. I bet “die hard” isn’t the movie.

      3. I’m guessing they don’t use the movie “Mississippi Burning” for that class. Kind of a shame, there are some excellent performances in that one; Hackman’s great in everything though.

  5. >>if states refuse to cooperate … federal gun control becomes difficult to enforce

    tax policy too. we’re idiots sending the Feds our money en masse.

    1. Yesterday immigration and marijuana, today guns, tomorrow taxes.

      This thing could take off. You will of course need the States to restrict federal access to bank accounts and payrolls of course. And if there are too many of us the throw in prison, what are they going to do? I call that a government that has formally lost its legitimacy, and I believe the current administration is hurtling in that direction.

      1. SleepyJoe will use his powerful mind, sharp intellect and unmatched charisma to keep this country unified and equitable.

      2. They will begin a “de-lousing” campaign on any 2A supporters. “Enter the showers for de-lousing, do not be alarmed”.

        1. If they are truly 2A supporters, just getting them to the showers might be a tad difficult, and costly.

          Only 5500 agents, you say?

          1. Just about anyone can afford 6k rounds of .223

            1. You don’t even need 6K. Once a few of them end up donating their kit to a group of concerned citizens enforcement activities will decline.

            2. Anybody over the age of about 26 yrs. and 5 days should be able to come up with at least one cheaper and already tested/proven option.

            3. Not right now they can’t.

              *If* you can find it, you can’t find it in those quantities, and it’s a dollar plus a round for cheap shit.

      3. Here in Nevada, the state has nothing to do with the administration of Federal income taxes. We don’t even file a state income tax form.

        If I cheerfully pay my Federal taxes every year, it’s to avert a federal response.

        On the other hand, the Federal government owns most of the land in Nevada, so the state government is probably open to easy blackmail.

        1. Who needs blackmail, when the governor and both houses are already trying to disarm the populace?

    2. the tax pyramid on the average citizen is completely inverted. More should go to local/sales than it should federal. We have completely inverted the preferred system.

      1. I had very little to do with it but agree otherwise.

  6. If we think because the laws stopped Trump from with holding monies from sanctuary cities, think again those laws will not be enforced upon Biden. As we have seen laws that apply to republicans do not apply to democrats.

    1. You should care more about the federal government not giving money to states. Federal government shouldn’t be the first leg of journey from tax money to states.

  7. This still puts us in absurd positions where things are both legal and illegal. Many things are even explicitly authorized, yet illegal. It’s merely dysfunction.

    1. The US Constitution is a bitch, eh?

      It’s certainly not perfect, but not only is it the best we have, looking around it seems to me to be the best there is.

  8. The IRS does not have enough people to audit every tax return. They audit a few and destroy their lives. Most others comply to avoid being destroyed.

    The ATF can and will do the same thing. They may only have 3k field agents available, but they will show up at someone’s home with 100 of them, damage the house as much as possible, kill the dog, arrest everyone and drag them out into the street, ransack the house, take what they want, ruin their victim with legal fees and throw them into prison.

    Message sent.

    1. Works until the neighborhood starts shooting back.

      1. Yes, I found that very annoying in Iraq. Savages! How dare they!

    2. Unless the owner has a 50 cal like they did at Waco. Then they will get “aired out” on the roof during a moronic daylight raid, then retaliate by killing children.

      1. Have you seen the 2018 TV series? I can’t imagine something like that getting made in the Biden era.

        1. Reading the wikipedia description of the series, sounds like they still whitewashed BATF and FBI actions. For instance, there never was any question of which side shot first, one of the agents admitted they’d been the first to shoot on the day of the raid, before everyone was gotten together to be issued a common story.

          1. You should watch the series. It doesn’t put the FBI or BATF in a good light at all.

        2. There was a documentary made a few years back. They interview the negotiator and the leader of the assault. The negotiator was making headway. The leader of the assault did not want that. It was obvious that he was a low IQ idiot that was bucking to get in there and shoot people. That guy should have been sent to prison.

          1. In fact, the only reason they had the assault in the first place was that they were determined to have an assault for PR purposes.

            There was a bit of a scandal at the time, some BATF agents had been caught at a white supremacist gathering selling “N**** hunting licenses”, and were exposed by a militia group. And the agency’s funding renewal was coming up in Congress.

            “Operation Showtime” was their codename for the assault.

            They actually accelerated the schedule for the attack when Koresh invited them to come over and peacefully inspect everything.

          2. Everyone should watch the documentary “Waco: Rules of Engagement”, which came out in 1997. The feds come off badly, to say the least. It is a stark reminder that our government officials are ready and willing to kill American citizens, and the government won’t punish those government officials. (Government officials set the rules and decide who interprets and judges them.)

    3. Worked really well with marijuana legalization, didn’t it?

    4. They aren’t going to do any of that without local law enforcement cooperation.

      This is the difference: in the past, Federal LE could always depend on the cooperation and assistance of local LE. That might not be so certain anymore, in some circumstances.

  9. The last nullification crisis preceded the civil war.

    1. The last nullification crisis was marijuana legalization.

      1. I mean, he’s not wrong, now is he?

  10. OK, so a state says it will not enforce federal gun control laws.
    Then all the social(ist) media companies say they will not allow use of their apps in those states, and the national banks say they will not process any state transactions such as tax deposits or payrolls. The airlines cancel all flights in and out of those states, and Disney and Amazon say they will not deliver streaming services, and UPS, Fedex, and USPS say “no deliveries”.
    What then?

    1. Sounds like a great opportunity for a bunch of new start-up organizations to jump in and fill the gap.

      1. Bingo. Besides, are “apps” really benefiting us? When I break away and go up to the mountains with zero internet, everyone I encounter looks happy. You don’t see that on the subway.

      2. Sure is; tell it to Parler.

    2. What then, all the urban dem controlled cities with turn into even bigger shitholes than they are now while the rural area will sit back and laugh at the azzholes living in those cities.

    3. There is a limit to what corporations are willing to engage, and that is determined by money, and their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders.

      Sure, Coca Cola, MLB, and Delta will go along, gauge the environment, and pacify the wokissariat as a cost of business to quell the howling virtual mob, but do you honestly think they are actually going to incur any kind of financial loss to this? No, at the end of the day shareholders talk, and “stakeholders” walk.

      1. Look at Nike as an example of maybe the most woke company in the US. Of course they depend on sales of their products to woke customers. I would bet this is how realistic companies determine just how woke they will be.

        1. Nike supports slavery.

          1. so does the NBA … the ironing is thick

      2. Everyone should boycott Coca-Cola.
        The left because it was invented by a Confederate Lt. Colonel, the right because the company thinks it has the right to overrule the freely elected Georgia legislature.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stith_Pemberton

    4. You think they’ll give up that money?

      Nope. We can stay retarded for longer than they can stay solvent.

    5. If those private companies are making those decisions under coercion from the federal government, then they have become de facto agents of the government and their conduct can be enjoined via lawsuit.

      If they are making those decision independently, a) that creates an opportunity for competitors to fill the niche(s) and potentially to build capabilities to replace them and b) they’d have to do without all the revenue from those states. Maybe Amazon would boycott Montana but they don’t have the stomach for the financial losses of boycotting multiple states.

    6. Lawsuits for Restraint of Trade or Commerce or some such thing

      easy to deal with.

  11. Not the first time I have posted what I learned in the US Army’s Leadership Preparation Course; ‘Never give an order you know will be ignored’.

    I can remember when Kennedy had to send the National Guard to Alabama to enforce laws that were being ignored. Probably not the first time it happened but the first time in my lifetime I remembered it. Problem is at some point there is simply not enough will or manpower for the feds to enforce it’s orders that are being ignored.

    In the bigger picture the current political climate seems to be built on sand. There is a massive urban/rural divide with the urban areas almost totally dependent on the rural areas to survive. Water and food are the two most obvious examples. Rural areas would have much less of a problem getting along if both food and water supplies were stopped, even for a couple of days.

    All this 2A stuff is just a single example of a much greater divide and sad to say I don’t see things getting better.

    1. Eisenhower, General, don’t forget Eisenhower.

      Woodrow Wilson Mann, the mayor of Little Rock, asked President Eisenhower to send federal troops to enforce integration and protect the nine students. On September 24, the President ordered the 101st Airborne Division of the United States Army—without its black soldiers, who rejoined the division a month later—to Little Rock and federalized the entire 10,000-member Arkansas National Guard, taking it out of Faubus’s control

    2. Not the first time I have posted what I learned in the US Army’s Leadership Preparation Course; ‘Never give an order you know will be ignored’.

      I didn’t go through any army leadership courses, but the phrase I learned was “Never give an order you can’t enforce.” The dog can live without a tail, whether it wags or not, but a tail can’t live without a dog.

      1. But thats in the contect of a real, near term situation / goal.

        This insane UN led Cabal to disarm everyone has no right nor reason nor sense. Its a Mad Man (Men) after a goal, be damned the consequences.

        Cant enforce it today? Theres always the next brain dead generation to pull it on.

  12. The author of this article must not understand federalism. After talking about a Florida law that would prohibit state employees from enforcing federal law, he says, “Defying federal law is something that a majority of states already do…”

    This is silly because states do not enforce federal laws as a matter of course. They have no jurisdiction to enforce federal laws. Federal laws having nothing to do with state laws. (except bullshit like pre-emption, but that has nothing to do with enforcement)

    Some states bend over backwards to help the feds though. And this needs to be reigned in. But even that is not “defying” the federal government.

    The fact that people think we need these laws is the truly scary thing.

    1. So, the federal government makes a regulation that my weapon is illegal to possess; I say to hell with that, and do not surrender it.

      So I take it out to a local range; are you suggesting that I have nothing to worry about from the local police, sheriffs department, or state police?
      Just google it; local law enforcement often utilize federal laws to conduct their business; just as Boldin stated in the interview.

      [links to follow: looks like Reason might actually be cracking down on the spam bots?]

          1. In this article, the state authorities came to a house. They took all the guns, which can happen at the state level as part of a safety thing.

            But then it was the ATF doing the prosecution about the gun law. So the star must have turned the gun over to the feds.

            Hopefully, the new laws will keep that from happening. But precision is required when talking about these things.

        1. The raccoon article says they are charged with felonies. The feds are not mentioned, so that must mean Iowa itself has a law about modifying a rifle in that way. (The article is vague about what jurisdiction the case is under. I assume state court). The other charges are easily included in a state’s general police power.

          State courts have no jurisdiction nor ability to enforce federal law.

          1. IA is a Police State so dont let anything surprise you there

      1. If the state authorities bug you, all they can do is report you to the feds like a snitch. Yes, that needs to be reigned in, and these laws could help stop that.

        But they have no ability to actually take legal action against you themselves. If they do anything to you, then it’s illegal. Let’s say they bring you in. There’s nothing to be done at the state level because there’s no state law.

        1. You sound like an attorney; if so I am quite certain you are familiar with the concept of “dual sovereignty” whereby if one [Federal or State jurisdiction] can’t convict you, they will help the other to do so?
          Different issue, but at least from my perspective, same principle.

          We do need protection from agents of the State assisting and consorting with those of the Federal, especially as it concerns overreach and violation of Constitutional rights.

          1. Yes, it agree with you here completely. My word wrangling obscured that.

    2. Actually, most states do enforce federal laws as a matter of course. Police and prosecutors have discretion to charge you under any applicable law. They regularly cherry-pick the law based on the sentence (and likelihood of success) they hope to achieve.

      If you’re statement were true, only the FBI (or Secret Service, etc) could prosecute for violations of federal law – and that just doesn’t happen. In fact, it’s quite rare. Almost all violations of federal law are prosecuted by state and local authorities. There is no jurisdictional conflict in doing so.

      1. Excuse me – “your statement”
        Can we please have an edit button?

      2. Sorry, but what you wrote is not true. State courts have no ability nor jurisdiction to do anything with federal laws. You will find no cases where federal law is the basis of a state trial.

        However, it is true that the states very often help federal prosecution, such as turning over evidence, turning people in, etc. I agree this is bad and needs to stop.

        Also, I’m 100% with you on the edit button.

        1. Is ‘ignore’ part of “do with” or is it not?

    3. POINT! SCORE!

      This may be a re-play of the “Sanctuary Cities block enforcement of immigration Law.”

      Goose, Gander.

  13. Meanwhile I sense a stealth method of getting the feds to ignore border security and leave it up to the states. How about the feds ignore what citizens do legally on a daily basis and leave us alone, but police the damn borders anyway.

  14. “taking a page from the playbook of immigration activists by advancing legislation that would make their enforcement illegal.”

    Because defending yourself from an overreaching, tyrannical government is totally the same as selectively enforcing immigration law.

  15. That’s called doing an end run around the constitution.

    Without federalism, there is no country, no constitution.

    1. Actually, without the Constitution, there is no Federal government.

      1. Correct. There are still fifty States.

        1. States without a constitution.

          1. I think most of the states have their own constitutions, which largely (but not 100%) mimic the US Constitution.

            E.g. Georgia’s starts with a Bill of Rights in Article I.

            CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA
            PREAMBLE
            To perpetuate the principles of free government, insure justice to all, preserve
            peace, promote the interest and happiness of the citizen and of the family, and transmit to
            posterity the enjoyment of liberty, we the people of Georgia, relying upon the protection
            and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
            ARTICLE I.
            BILL OF RIGHTS
            SECTION I.
            RIGHTS OF PERSONS
            Paragraph I. Life, liberty, and property. No person shall be deprived of life,
            liberty, or property except by due process of law.
            Paragraph II. Protection to person and property; equal protection. Protection to
            person and property is the paramount duty of government and shall be impartial and
            complete. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws.
            Paragraph III. Freedom of conscience. Each person has the natural and
            inalienable right to worship God, each according to the dictates of that person’s own
            conscience; and no human authority should, in any case, control or interfere with such
            right of conscience.
            Paragraph IV. Religious opinions; freedom of religion. No inhabitant of this
            state shall be molested in person or property or be prohibited from holding any public
            office or trust on account of religious opinions; but the right of freedom of religion shall
            not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent
            with the peace and safety of the state.
            Paragraph V. Freedom of speech and of the press guaranteed. No law shall be
            passed to curtail or restrain the freedom of speech or of the press. Every person may
            speak, write, and publish sentiments on all subjects but shall be responsible for the abuse
            of that liberty.
            Paragraph VI. Libel. In all civil or criminal actions for libel, the truth may be
            given in evidence; and, if it shall appear to the trier of fact that the matter charged as
            libelous is true, the party shall be discharged.
            Paragraph VII. Citizens, protection of. All citizens of the United States, resident
            in this state, are hereby declared citizens of this state; and it shall be the duty of the
            General Assembly to enact such laws as will protect them in the full enjoyment of the
            rights, privileges, and immunities due to such citizenship.
            Article I. Section I. Paragraph I.
            2
            Paragraph VIII. Arms, right to keep and bear. The right of the people to keep
            and bear arms shall not be infringed, but the General Assembly shall have power to
            prescribe the manner in which arms may be borne.
            Paragraph IX. Right to assemble and petition. The people have the right to
            assemble peaceably for their common good and to apply by petition or remonstrance to
            those vested with the powers of government for redress of grievances.
            Paragraph X. Bill of attainder; ex post facto laws; and retroactive laws. No bill
            of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or laws impairing the obligation of
            contract or making irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities shall be passed.
            Paragraph XI. Right to trial by jury; number of jurors; selection and
            compensation of jurors. (a) The right to trial by jury shall remain inviolate, except that
            the court shall render judgment without the verdict of a jury in all civil cases where no
            issuable defense is filed and where a jury is not demanded in writing by either party. In
            criminal cases, the defendant shall have a public and speedy trial by an impartial jury; and
            the jury shall be the judges of the law and the facts.
            (b) A trial jury shall consist of 12 persons; but the General Assembly may
            prescribe any number, not less than six, to constitute a trial jury in courts of limited
            jurisdiction and in superior courts in misdemeanor cases.
            (c) The General Assembly shall provide by law for the selection and
            compensation of persons to serve as grand jurors and trial jurors.
            Paragraph XII. Right to the courts. No person shall be deprived of the right to
            prosecute or defend, either in person or by an attorney, that person’s own cause in any of
            the courts of this state.
            Paragraph XIII. Searches, seizures, and warrants. The right of the people to be
            secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and
            seizures shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue except upon probable cause
            supported by oath or affirmation particularly describing the place or places to be searched
            and the persons or things to be seized.
            Paragraph XIV. Benefit of counsel; accusation; list of witnesses; compulsory
            process. Every person charged with an offense against the laws of this state shall have
            the privilege and benefit of counsel; shall be furnished with a copy of the accusation or
            indictment and, on demand, with a list of the witnesses on whose testimony such charge is
            founded; shall have compulsory process to obtain the testimony of that person’s own
            witnesses; and shall be confronted with the witnesses testifying against such person.
            Paragraph XV. Habeas corpus. The writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended
            unless, in case of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it.
            Article I. Section I. Paragraph VIII.
            3
            Paragraph XVI. Self-incrimination. No person shall be compelled to give
            testimony tending in any manner to be self-incriminating.
            Paragraph XVII. Bail; fines; punishment; arrest, abuse of prisoners. Excessive
            bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
            punishments inflicted; nor shall any person be abused in being arrested, while under
            arrest, or in prison.
            Paragraph XVIII. Jeopardy of life or liberty more than once forbidden. No
            person shall be put in jeopardy of life or liberty more than once for the same offense
            except when a new trial has been granted after conviction or in case of mistrial.
            Paragraph XIX. Treason. Treason against the State of Georgia shall consist of
            insurrection against the state, adhering to the state’s enemies, or giving them aid and
            comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason except on the testimony of two
            witnesses to the same overt act or confession in open court.
            Paragraph XX. Conviction, effect of. No conviction shall work corruption of
            blood or forfeiture of estate.
            Paragraph XXI. Banishment and whipping as punishment for crime. Neither
            banishment beyond the limits of the state nor whipping shall be allowed as a punishment
            for crime.
            Paragraph XXII. Involuntary servitude. There shall be no involuntary servitude
            within the State of Georgia except as a punishment for crime after legal conviction
            thereof or for contempt of court.
            Paragraph XXIII. Imprisonment for debt. There shall be no imprisonment for
            debt.
            Paragraph XXIV. Costs. No person shall be compelled to pay costs in any
            criminal case except after conviction on final trial.
            Paragraph XXV. Status of the citizen. The social status of a citizen shall never be
            the subject of legislation.
            Paragraph XXVI. Exemptions from levy and sale. The General Assembly shall
            protect by law from levy and sale by virtue of any process under the laws of this state a
            portion of the property of each person in an amount of not less than $1,600.00 and shall
            have authority to define to whom any such additional exemptions shall be allowed; to
            specify the amount of such exemptions; to provide for the manner of exempting such
            property and for the sale, alienation, and encumbrance thereof; and to provide for the
            waiver of said exemptions by the debtor.
            Article I. Section I. Paragraph XVI.
            4
            Paragraph XXVII. Spouse’s separate property. The separate property of each
            spouse shall remain the separate property of that spouse except as otherwise provided by
            law.
            Paragraph XXVIII. Fishing and hunting. The tradition of fishing and hunting
            and the taking of fish and wildlife shall be preserved for the people and shall be managed
            by law and regulation for the public good.
            Paragraph XXIX. Enumeration of rights not denial of others. The enumeration
            of rights herein contained as a part of this Constitution shall not be construed to deny to
            the people any inherent rights which they may have hitherto enjoyed.

          2. Rob Misek, “States without a constitution”
            Apollonius, “Actually, without the Constitution, there is no Federal government”

            And here the State’s are but INSISTING the U.S. Constitution STILL EXISTS…. You’re statements are correct; and the federal IGNORANCE of the Constitution RIGHT-NOW is why the USA is failing massively.

            1. If we obviously aren’t protecting the existing US constitution, what makes you think we could protect 50 separate constitutions?

              Much less finding the wisdom of 50 groups of founders to establish new, state constitution.

              1. My response was intended for mpercy.

            2. HAS failed, past – tense. Just because we survive the train wreck doesnt mean the carnage doesnt exist.

          3. Wrong. The Constitution belongs to the PEOPLE, not the Gimmemint.

            Your Big Government meme is showing!

  16. Why isn’t Idaho on the list of states that have nullified federal gun controls?

      1. Last count, ID State Law imposed a FIVE DOLLAR fine for pointing a loaded gun at someone.

        Id call that more like Freedom.

  17. Tom Woods wrote a good book on nullification back in 09 and didn’t Cathy Young (neocon) blast him? Any local police assoication that doesn’t support obviously is putting their self financial interest in front of protecting the natural rights of their community…sad.

    Regarding a comparison with Sanctuary Cities, not even close. Sanc Cities are when local govt decides to not protect the life, liberty and property of its citizens but not reporting criminal illegal aliens to the Feds…that is not nullification but a failure of the local govt to live up to the Declaration of Independence they all signed up for by joining the United States.

    1. Let the Feds enforce their own damned laws. You don’t think local law enforcement also profit from lucrative contracts with ICE? They only give that up when local sentiment is overwhelmingly in favor of immigration. And in that case their local governments should reflect the wishes of their constituents, not DC.

  18. If all the states that are trying to limit what the Feds are trying to do to limit gun rights would join together to resist the Feds I think that it would be much more effective.
    I also think the states that might try to go independent if the would stick together it would have much more force behind the effort. Those who would oppose these states going independent would find it would be much harder to do if there is a large group of states trying to go independent together would be much more impressive and would have a much larger effect if all the states did the independence thing at the same time. I hope these states will stick together on this one.

    1. “I also think the states that might try to go independent i”

      SECESSION IS THE ANSWER

      At my last count, all of parts of 21 States were mulling Secession

      The South warned us. We didnt listen.

  19. This is a truly awesome development from so many perspectives. It protects the individual right to bear arms in those states. It imposes yet more limits on federal power. It promotes federalism among the right and left and forced both sides to confront their hypocrisy on the issue. You can’t coherently object to local nullification of federal immigration law while supporting nullification of federal gun control, and vice versa.

  20. Nullifying the ‘federal’ Nazi Regime and insisting the Constitution still exists is exactly what will SAVE this Nazi (def; National Socialist) battered/invaded country. It really is a last-hope motion before massive civil unrest starts.

    Democrats have always had the ability to govern there own cities; subsidizing the failures of those idiotic decisions isn’t making anyone better off.

  21. Now that their efforts to bully girls with coathanger abortion laws have tossed mystical conservatives out of office, pretending to imitate libertarians may improve their political chances. By pretending to support any part of the Bill of Rights, they arm fellow looters of more communistic persuasions with a pretext to lump non-aggression libertarians in with religious fanatics who only want semiautomatic weapons in order to shoot people at Planned Parenthood clinics. Tarbrushing us by association weakens libertarian spoiler vote clout.

  22. These laws are un-Constitutional in total. However, they are aimed at Corporations (un-Constitutional) and Police (doubly un Constitutional)

    Laws do not tell us what we can or cant do. they tell the Police and Courts in what areas they can run rough-shod over our Rights and get away with it.

    These gun laws are primarily enforceable on Corporations and are just a tactic to try to harass gun manufacturers and distributors/dealers by, for example, making the paperwork and procedures so complex that Average Joe Dealer cant deal with it.

    Did you know having a Class III license for a machine gun allows the Feds to enter your home at 2 AM and inspect it?

    The Founding Fathers would call them a bunch of Mothers.

  23. Problem, Part Deux
    The SAME LAWMAKERS crying about this are also presiding over wholly UN CONSTITUTIONAL GUN LAWS IN THEIR OWN STATES

    Goddamn Hyporcrites, if you ask me,.

  24. 38 more states need to join the “To Nullify Federal Gun Control”. Better yet nullify every laws the Biden administration passes, they are all train wrecks of laws. The border, spending, spying, feds running elections. I can’t think of one good Biden administration law or executive order. Biden will go down as the worst president in US history.

  25. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. WER This is enough for me to happy my family..how ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily…Visit Here

  26. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. WERT This is enough for me to happy my family..how ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily…Visit Here

  27. At least some of the states support the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Second amendment, even if the Federal government no longer does, and the Supreme court is a bunch of scared wusses.

Please to post comments