Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Federal Government Declares War On States Promoting Gun Rights

May 3, 2013 by  

Attorney General Eric Holder sent a letter to Kansas Governor Sam Brownback attacking legislation recently passed in the State that nullifies unConstitutional Federal gun laws.

Kansas is the first State to be called out by the Federal government for its attempt to nullify gun laws deemed unConstitutional within its borders; a number of other gun-friendly States have taken similar legislative action.

The Kansas law (SB102), which took effect late last month, declares that the Federal government has no authority to regulate firearms manufactured, sold and kept only in Kansas. It also makes it a felony offense for Federal agents to attempt to enforce any law, regulation, order or treaty affecting firearms.

In his letter, dated April 26, Holder said that the Justice Department will not acknowledge the law because, “Under the Supremacy Clause…Kansas may not prevent federal employees and officials from carrying out their official responsibilities. And a state certainly may not criminalize the exercise of federal responsibilities.”

Holder continues, “Because SB102 conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulations, federal law supercedes this new statute; all provisions of federal laws and their implementing regulations therefore continue to apply.”

The AG went on to inform Brownback that Federal authorities “will continue to execute their duties to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations. Moreover, the United States will take all appropriate action, including litigation if necessary, to prevent the State of Kansas from interfering with the activities of federal officials enforcing federal law.”

Eric Holder Threatens Kansas Over Gun Control Nullification

 

Holder will have his work cut out for him if he declares war on Kansas’s strong pro-gun legislation, as the State is among more than 30 others that have either begun the process of considering or have already passed similar legislation. They include: Alabama, Arizona, Kentucky, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Federal Government Declares War On States Promoting Gun Rights”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Roger Long

    The federal government only has the power that is enumerated to them by the states. The feds have no say. Look up the “Dick Act of 1902.”

    • jdn

      The federal government has long held that laws do not apply to them ( ie the long and continuing string of Constitutional abuses , the continual proclamations from Congress excluding themselves from laws , regulations and prosecution ) . It will not surprise me to see a state of siege against any state of this country . True irony would be for the states involved to receive support from Russia in their conflict with the fed .

      • Michael Shreve

        The confederated received aid from France, but Russia would be a REALLY strange bedfellow.

    • perry holmes

      when has the feds ever stayed within the law Obama will be like #43 can’t leave the US after he leaves office in fear of the world court that makes me happy

  • http://www.facebook.com/daniel.w.cote.1 Daniel W. Cote

    The first time Holder enters one of these states he should be arrested. He’s the worst AG we’ve ever had. He only enforces laws he agrees with which in itself is against the law. I hope he gets what he deserves in the end. He needs to go to jail with Obama and all his minions who don’t uphold their oaths of office.

  • Dragon 1

    Eric Holder proved his worthlessness in the Fast & Furious that sent all those guns south of the border and then denide that he had anything to do with it, the SOB is another Lier just like Obama !! I live in Texas and I hope that if any of those truspots that come down here and try to implement ristrictions get thrown in jail and have sunlight piped to them through a straw. Holder needs to resign his post because he thinks he is above the law and can do whatever he wants , just like that other nut in the White house. Too much government and tooo much crap and Lies.

    • FreedomFighter

      You as Americans must be disarmed for what comes next…because your not going to like a totalitarian state that controls every facet of your life from cradle to an early grave.

      Laus Deo
      Semper FI

  • Capt. Jack Sparrow the 3rd

    Liar’s should never prosper, Ob should Resign and holder also, they just don’t understand – its not a one-way street !

    • TexRancher

      Unfortunately,Dictators never resign……..

  • KyKPH

    The big question is: Why in the hell do we keep electing these goofballs?

    • TexRancher

      The big question is: Are there any real AMERICANS left in the former democrat (Now socialist) party? As citizens, they have as much to lose as those of us out here in the real world and probably more when it all hits the fan! For some reason, they just can’t see it.

      • tinker2

        The “Publicans” and “Dumocraps” vote against each other just for spite and NOT for the countries best interests. High dollar “sponsorships are in control – not “the people”.

    • Rancher

      We don’t! The progressives have been stealing elections, local , state and now the last two national elections. Check out http://www.stopvoterfraud.info for how it was done in 2008 and we are updating with 2012 now. Demand voter ID for everyone!

      • alex.frazier@charter.net

        That voter fraud is what the voter ID cards are intended to prevent. That’s why the Democrats are so firmly against it. If they don’t have people voting three times, dead people voting, and illegals voting, they can’t win.

    • bmrtoyo

      we didnt ., we know this plant got in through voter fraud , its time for impeachment ,

  • Dirty Daug

    I’d love to see some feds being arrested for trying to enforce some gun law. Just wandering what the Federal Government would do about that. I think the Feds should go to Phoenix Arizona and try arresting someone only to get threw into Sheriff Joe’s jail. Maybe Eric Holder and Obama should go themselves and try to enforce some Federal gun law.

    • alex.frazier@charter.net

      It WOULD be rather interesting to see how they handled it. Technically, Washington isn’t a state. It’s a province. The Federal government isn’t provided any autonomous judicial authority. The states would have jurisdiction if there was a violation of laws that were made in pursuance of the Constitution.
      It would be interesting.

  • securityman

    now they are bringing the Constitution into it. they only use it when it is to their advantage. well, i don’t think that it is going to work this time. all the gun companys can and probably will and should move to states that will really help them instead of tear them down…….i stand with them…….

  • Christopher Richardson

    I would be somewhat sympathetic to the AG’s position if it were not for the fact that there are so many examples of state laws that conflict with federal laws that he turns a blind eye to (medical and recreation MJ vs. Federal drug laws, gay marriage vs. DOMA, etc) and Federal Laws he chooses not to enforce (immigration, prosecuting gun law violators, etc). It must be hard for him to live in such a world of cognitive dissonance. The term “shut up and color” comes to mind.

  • Wellarmed

    Thanks to Mr. Rolley for posting the letter from Holder. This is a much bigger problem than most realize, and I wish it were simply the second amendment that the fed was attacking. The arrests of Federal Agents is also in regards to any attempt at enforcing provisions of the NDAA.

    The Supremacy Clause cannot be used as a means to and end. If the Federal Government is acting in violation of the Constitution then the states are obligated to detain and prosecute any Federal Officer that may attempt to violate the rights of American Citizens present amongst their borders.

    Provisions of NDAA are clearly unconstitutional ( denial of due process/ indefinite detention ) as well as multiple provisions of the PATRIOT Act ( sneak and peak/ warrant-less searches etc… ).

    As I have said before in multiple posts; if the Federal Government is no longer willing to adhere to the limitations placed on it by our Constitution, then the States MUST take it upon themselves to enforce the laws evenly and to ALL lest we merely accept our countries demise and the acceptance of tyranny..

  • Jake Thomas

    If this is true, then why doesn’t the government go after illegals. Afterall, it is the law. And when the government doesn’t enforce illegal immigration and because of that the state does, the government wants to take the state to court. Seems like Holder only wants to enforce some federal laws and not others. After listening to Holder for this long, I’m convinced that he only got to where he is was by affirmative actions.

  • lraivala

    Hey Eric, You mean the states should abide by the constitutional powers of the Federal government? Then why don’t you start leading by example, ie: Immigration laws or here is another concept try enforcing the current laws on the books. With over 14,000 people using fraudulent info on gun applications and only 42 trials shouldn’t that be a first priority before you pass another law? Screw you Jackwagon…

    • alex.frazier@charter.net

      Explain what you mean about fraudulent info on gun applications. When you buy a gun, you have to present state issued picture identification, and your name is run for a background check through the state law enforcement division for any felonious history, or any history of criminal domestic violence.
      To give a fraudulent name, you would need a fraudulent ID. Other than that, there’s not much you can lie about that they can’t and won’t check when they run your name.

    • bmrtoyo

      yaaaaa

  • FreedomFighter

    “will continue to execute their duties to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations. Moreover, the United States will take all appropriate action, including litigation if necessary, to prevent the State of Kansas from interfering with the activities of federal officials enforcing federal law.”

    NWO agents will continue to execute unconstitutional mandates to enforce communist NWO federal firearms laws and regulations of disarmament of Americans. Moreover the Obama Regime will take all appropriate action, including invasion if necessary, to prevent the State of Kansas from interfering with the takeover of the United States by rogue entities activities, whom are now posing as federal officials enforcing totalitarian NWO law.
    The takeover is proceeding.
    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

  • JeffH

    Is anybody really surprised?

    As Barack Obama begins his second term in office, trust in the federal government remains mired near a historic low, while frustration with government remains high. And for the first time, a majority of the public says that the federal government threatens their personal rights and freedoms.

    Obama doesn’t care about court decisions or laws and basically says he will do whatever he wants and opponents will have to sue him.

    – nullification

    – Obama.com, a website owned by an Obama fundraiser who lives in China but has
    visited the Obama White House 11 times, sends solicitations mostly to foreign
    email addresses and links to the Obama campaign website’s donation
    page.
    The Obama website, unlike those of most campaigns, doesn’t ask for
    the three- or four-digit credit card verification number. That makes it easier
    for donors to use fictitious names and addresses to send money in.

    – the Obama administration was thumbing its nose at a ruling by the
    U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The court threw out the
    2012 mandate for cellulosic biofuels, saying it was based on wishful thinking
    rather than accurate estimates for an industry the Obama administration wants to encourage. Yet the EPA would nearly double the mandate for biofuel in 2013.

    – Obama disagrees with federal law, which criminalizes the use of medical
    marijuana. Congress has not repealed the law. No matter. The president instructs his Justice Department not to prosecute transgressors.

    – disregarding enforcement of Illegal immigration laws…lawsuit against Arizona.

    – executive order that directs officers to no longer deport certain illegal
    immigrants.

    – the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate requirements that would allow states to continue drawing welfare funds, provided they move at least 20 percent more people from welfare to work.

    – The Department of Health and Human Services issues Obamacare regulations treading so heavily on the free-exercise rights of Catholic institutions

    – not enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act

    – Obama wants a new program and Congress won’t give it to him, he creates it
    regardless. Congress, including Democrats, wouldn’t pass his cap-and-trade
    legislation. His Environmental Protection Agency is now instituting it via a
    broad reading of the Clean Air Act.

    – let some states walk away from provisions in the No Child Left Behind law

    – He takes America into a war in Libya with U.N. approval but none from Congress.

    – Congress, again including members of his own party, wouldn’t pass his
    “card-check” legislation eliminating secret ballots in union elections. So he
    stacked the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with appointees who pushed through a “quickie” election law to accomplish much the same.

    – Congress wouldn’t pass “net neutrality” Internet regulations, so Mr. Obama’s
    Federal Communications Commission did it unilaterally.

    – He expanded the definition of “executive privilege” to deny House Republicans documents for their probe into the botched Fast and Furious operation, making a mockery of Congress’s oversight responsibilities.

    – when the Senate refused to confirm Obama’s new picks for the NLRB, he
    proclaimed the Senate to be in “recess” and appointed the members anyway, making a mockery of that chamber’s advice-and-consent role.

    – The government is supposed to compensate people if it takes their property.
    During oral argument in Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United
    States, a case involving the damage wrought by the Army Corps of Engineers
    in its operation of the Clearwater Dam in Arkansas, the Obama administration’s Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler advanced this remarkable proposition during oral argument trying to convince the U.S. Supreme Court that the federal government can deny landowners the use of their property for years, decades if need be, without ever paying compensation.

    – Obama administration refusing to implement Military Voter Protection Project.
    The Department of Defense is dragging its feet in enacting a law meant to boost military voting.

    – Obama’s administration is able to simultaneously break the law and misuse taxpayer money and do it all for purely political ends. The Labor Department issued guidance in July saying it would be “inappropriate” for contractors to issue notices of potential layoffs tied to sequestration cuts.

    Obama has mounted a continuous & nonstop campaign of division — black against white, rich against poor, straight against gay, religious against secular, race against race — the “lawless” president is seeking to build whatever loose coalition of support he can. This is just what “community organizers” do.

  • FreedomFighter

    “The criminal Obama Administration does not dare act against the American people until they get enough of our guns and subsequently render us defenseless. Their determination speaks to disarm the citizens speaks to their fear of the American people. If we give up our guns, the American people will sacrifice any leverage that they now enjoy over this criminal administration. Yet, we have become such sheep, as a nation, I do not know where we will find the collective backbone to stand up the tyranny which is threatening to enslave us. I fear most will give up their guns when called to do so. As you read on, you will quickly see the need to never, never, never give up our guns.

    Will Your Family Survive the Unfolding Tyranny?
    http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2013/04/21/will-your-family-survive-the-unfolding-tyranny/
    Laus DeoSemper FI

  • Subhunter

    I am totaly dismayed. The pres and VP are both traveling the country spewing their agenda to shred the Constitution. That is wrong on so many levels. It violates their Oath of office on 2 fronts. Who’s minding the store? They swore, to God…, to protect and defend our Constitution. What they are doing is an act of treason. They are rending our Constitution, and using our tax money to do it. Why are these traitors not in jail… I mean at least in jail. Every veteran took an oath very similar, but we had the Honor to uphold the vows we made, and protected and defended the Constitution. Some lost their lives doing so, some lost parts of their bodies, some left parts of their psyche in the combat zone. We did it to solidify democracy, and safeguard our Constitution and our country, so that our families, and yours, could live free under it’s protection.
    Go to your local Veterans Hospitol. Most of them have a sign near the entrance thet reads “The Price Of Freedom Is Visible Here”. We paid that price.
    And had we failed to uphold our oath we could have been shot, if it was during a time of war.
    C’mon folks make some noise. Get your families, and friends to make some noise.
    In recent years I have encountered several people who say to me “Thank you for your service”. This is a new response to Viet Nam vets. I’m a four tour Viet Nam vet. We didn’t enjoy the home comings we received. For many years most of us hid our military service. You have a tendency to do that when, coming home, you’ve had human feces dumped on you by the countrymen whose freedom, and rights you were fighting for.
    Every time I encounter a person who says “Thank you for your service”, or “Welcome home” it feels a little better. But if you really want to minimize those “feel bads”, then help us win this fight. This is your oppertunity to lead a movement that is every bit as important to our sovereignty as any war we have fought.
    God bless us all.

    • http://www.facebook.com/larrycr1 Larry Chrometattoos Rogers

      Im all with you brother..I thank you personally for serving and defending this once great country of ours..Its time for this country to unite and run these carpet baggers out of office..If you cant hold true to the US Constitution you should be removed from office and forcible if need be….

  • jimwilson81

    Holder doesn’t believe in enforcing laws, he believes in enforcing Obama’s wishes.

    • tinker2

      Hillary Clinton was pushing for gun control and socialized medicine when “Unkl Billy” was POTUS. SHE came ‘back home’ with the “United Nations Small Arms Treaty” – THEN all things turned to gun CONTROL. O’bumma-care is NOT cheap, and you can get fined for NOT conforming. POTUS and congress is attempting to exempt themselves from the “care package” they are forcing on us. Some “Elite people” are providing guns and money ( MILLION$$$$) overseas when they shout “gun CONTROL” at home and cry about national debt.

  • Incredulous_one

    Proud Kansan!

    • Dr Moon

      If we must form Militias to enforce the laws of the States, then at the request of the state we should do so. If the feds try to move on Kansas we should be there to meet them at the front door.

  • Michael Shreve

    NOTHING in the U.S. Constitution grants the federal government “supremacy” over the states. The powers granted to the U.S. government are specific and enumerated. IMPLIED powers are NEVER mentioned.

    • Old Wolf

      Well, there is a supremacy clause under article 6 of the constitution, but it only extends to those powers ‘in pursuance of’ granted powers in the constitution, and never to those powers that are forbidden.

    • bmrtoyo

      kansas should reply back, get bent !!!

  • JeffH

    Today, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach issued a statement in response to Eric Holder’s direct threat against the state for its new law, the 2nd Amendment Protection Act. It reads, in part:

    With respect to his concern that federal officials be allowed to enforce federal laws, Mr. Holder’s statement is a curious one. He was evidently not concerned that ATFE officials be allowed to enforce federal law when his agency oversaw the “fast and furious” operation to walk guns into the hands of Mexican cartels.

    The State of Kansas is determined to restore the Constitution and to protect the right of its citizens to keep and bear arms.
    http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/05/kansas-to-eric-holder-were-not-backing-down/

  • JeffH

    Sam Brownback Brushes off Eric Holder’s Opinions on 2nd Amendment Protection Act

    The State of Kansas is in receipt of your letter in which you place Kansas on notice regarding the view of the Obama Administration concerning the state’s Second Amendment Protection Act.

    Just because Eric Holder claims that the Kansas law is unconstitutional, doesn’t make it so. And Holder’s claim that he had no idea about “fast and furious” probably doesn’t make that so either.

    Sam Brownback did a great service to the People of Kansas by reminding them that Holder is just sharing his opinion.

    He also noted that the Kansas nullification law comes from the source of political power to which no American government is above – the People themselves.

    “The people of Kansas have clearly expressed their sovereign will.”

    Eric Holder doesn’t get to tell the People what THEIR constitution means. It’s the other way around.
    http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/05/sam-brownback-brushes-off-eric-holders-opinions-on-2nd-amendment-protection-act/

  • JeffH

    Bill Nullifying Acts Violating The Second Amendment Passes Missouri Senate 26-6.

    Just one day after Eric Holder sent a letter threatening Kansas if it enforces its recently passed Second Amendment Protection Act, the Missouri Senate thumbed its nose at the Attorney General and passed the Show-Me-State version of Second Amendment protection by a veto-proof majority.

    HB 436 passed the Senate 26-6 on Thursday.

    The House passed already passed the bill 115-41, also a veto-proof majority. But the Senate added three amendments, and the bill must no go back to the House for concurrence.

    If passed into law, HB436 would nullify virtually every federal gun control measure on the books – or planned for the future. It reads, in part:
    http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/05/bill-nullifying-acts-violating-the-second-amendment-passes-missouri-senate-26-6/

  • JeffH

    There is absolutely ZERO serious dispute about the fact that the federal government cannot “commandeer” the states to carry out its laws. None. Even the Supreme Court has affirmed this multiple times.

    In the 1992 case, New York v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress couldn’t require states to enact specified waste disposal regulations.

    In the 1997 case, Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not command state law enforcement authorities to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers.

    In the 2012 case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court ruled that a significant expansion of Medicaid was not a valid exercise of Congress’s spending power, as it would coerce states to either accept the expansion or risk losing existing Medicaid funding.

    In each of these cases, the Supreme Court made is quite clear that their opinion is that the federal government cannot require the states to act, or even coerce them to act through a threat to lose funding. Their opinion is correct. If the feds pass a law, they can sure try to enforce it if they want. But the states absolutely do NOT have to help them in any way.
    http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/05/texas-action-alert-2nd-gun-control-nullification-bill-hits-the-house-floor-on-saturday/

    • bmrtoyo

      your avatar is funny , !

  • mnkysnkle

    Most federal gun laws are unconstitutional, therefore the feds have no authority to enforce them as they are illegal. The states are “again” reiterating that fact with this type of legislation. Yes Eric, let’s talk about gunrunning, only let‘s do it before a grand jury!

  • ireAmerica

    Eric Holder is a criminal. His statement that “Federal authorities will continue to execute their duties… “, is too ironic. If they actually did do that, Eric Holder would be in prison.

  • tinker2

    TRUE assault weapons WERE defined and BANNED in 1938. The “new definition” of assault weapons are LEGAL hunting rifles, carbines and shotguns that CAN ACCEPT hi-cap magazines, AND, “look military”.
    “The car killed the little girl on her bicycle. The drunk was just sitting behind the wheel.” Background checks have been law for decades, and crooks STILL get guns and drugs ‘on the street’ any time they want. There used to be laws for specific sentences for crimes INVOLVING a gun. What ever happened to it ? We need to enforce the current laws, not just make more “to look pretty”.

  • Tough Guy

    All the Dems. want to do is raise our taxes and harass hard working citizens. Only Dem. President, that I know of is Truman, reading about him stood honest and saved self worth, and dignity of our citizens. Didn’t raise our taxes too much!

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.