STATE LEVEL BILLS TO OUTLAW ABORTION & CRIMINALIZE SUCH AS MURDER, GROWING NATIONWIDE

STATE LEVEL BILLS TO OUTLAW ABORTION & CRIMINALIZE SUCH AS MURDER, 

GROWING NATIONWIDE 

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2019/02/09/state-level-bills-to-outlaw-abortion-criminalize-as-murder-growing-nationwide/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

The number of state-level bills being presented to outlaw abortion is increasing nationwide, with more lawmakers submitting legislation to ignore and defy Roe. Idaho, Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Indiana are all currently considering legislation that would protect the unborn as persons and criminalize the act of abortion as murder.

As previously reported, in Idaho, Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, and Rep. John Green, R-Post Falls, have introduced the Idaho Abortion Human Rights Act, which would remove an exemption for abortion from the state’s homicide laws.

“Idaho code defines a fetus as a human and says killing a human is murder. Abortion is in contradiction to the inalienable rights recognized in the Idaho Constitution, and the State of Idaho has the authority to nullify federal laws that would allow abortions,” the bill reads in part.

A number of Idaho pastors have also joined together to release a “Mercy Statement” in support of Scott and Green’s legislation.

“We hereby appeal to our elected lawmakers to establish laws that will ensure this right [to life] be properly applied to every child in the womb. We even go as far as to stand ready to make available safe homes to every unwanted child within the land,” it reads. “We give our hearty agreement with the proposed language of the Idaho Abortion Human Rights Act. We are asking you to do what is right in the eyes of God and pass this bill.”

In Texas, Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington, has again presented the Abolition of Abortion in Texas Act, which was first filed in 2017 in response to language in the Texas Republican Party platform that calls for “legislation stopping the murder of unborn children; and to ignore and refuse to enforce any and all federal statutes, regulations, executive orders, and court rulings, which would deprive an unborn child of the right to life.”

“A living human child, from the moment of fertilization upon the fusion of a human spermatozoon with a human ovum, is entitled to the same rights, powers, and privileges as are secured or granted by the laws of this state to any other human child,” the bill reads in part.

Similarly, in Oklahoma, Sen. Joseph Silk, R-Broken Bow, has re-filed Senate Bill 13, which outlines that the definition of a human being includes the unborn, and “from the moment of fertilization.”

Therefore, under existing state homicide statutes, which define the crime as “the killing of one human being by another,” the unborn would be equally protected, and specifically regarding “acts which cause the death of an unborn child committed during an abortion.”

“Any federal statute, regulation, executive order or court decision which purports to supersede, stay or overrule this [bill] is in violation of the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma and the Constitution of the United States of America and is therefore void,” the bill also declares.

The legislation was first presented in 2016, but was stalled by Republican state leadership.

In South Carolina, State Sen. Richard Cash, R-Anderson, and state Rep. Josiah Magnuson, R-Spartanburg, have sponsored the Personhood Act, which “acknowledges that personhood is God-given, as all men are created in the image of God” and “[t]he right to life for each born and preborn human being vests at fertilization.”

It also outlines that if a woman’s life is at risk, “the physician shall make reasonable medical efforts under the circumstances to preserve both the life of the mother and the life of the preborn human being in a manner consistent with accepted medical standards.”

The bill is identical to legislation presented in 2017 by Sen. Kevin Bryant, R-Anderson.

Last month, Indiana Rep. Curt Nisly, R-Goshen, re-filed the “Protection at Conception” bill, House Bill 1430, which “redefines ‘human being’ for the purposes of the criminal code to conform to the finding that human physical life begins when a human ovum is fertilized by a human sperm.”

It also nixes language in state statutes pertaining to the allowance and the regulation of abortion in Indiana.

When Nisly filed the legislation last year, he plainly declared that the purpose of the bill is “to bring the Roe v. Wade era to its logical conclusion” and “to deregulate abortion right out of existence in Indiana.”

“I am pleased how mainstream this approach has become across the country over the last few years,” Nisly said in a statement. “There are many other states that are considering protection of life legislation, and the federal government also had a bill last year that acquired 117 sponsors, including 3 congressmen from Indiana.”

Similar bills were filed in Colorado and Missouri in 2016 and 2017, respectively, but were unsuccessful.

As previously reported, even in early America, the belief that abortion is murder was not uncommon.

Wharton

Philadelphia legal writer, educator and Christian apologist Francis Wharton, who wrote several books on American law, penned an entire chapter on abortion in his book “American Criminal Law,” published in 1855.

Wharton called abortionists “persons who are ready to degrade their humanity to this occupation” and stated in regard to abortion in general, “Such conduct cannot be too strongly condemned, and is the more deserving of receiving the punishment awarded for the criminal offense in question.”

In 1850, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court became the first high court in the nation to declare that abortion must be prohibited at any stage of gestation for any reason. While other state courts allowed preborn babies to be aborted up to four months of gestation by reason of a “quickening” theory, which stated that a person was not protected until the mother felt them kicking in the womb, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would accept no such argument.

In Mills v. Commonwealth, the court declared that the theory “is not … the law in Pennsylvania, and ought never to have been the law anywhere.” The ruling became a strong precedent that other state courts began to review and follow.

By the 1900’s, due to the influence of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, nearly every state in the nation prohibited abortion for any reason, with the exception of Arkansas, Mississippi and North Carolina.

TENNESSEE LAWMAKERS AGAIN FILE BILL DECLARING SUPREME COURT SAME-SEX "MARRIAGE" RULING "VOID" IN STATE

TENNESSEE LAWMAKERS AGAIN FILE BILL DECLARING SUPREME COURT SAME-SEX "MARRIAGE" RULING 

"VOID" IN STATE 

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2019/02/09/tennessee-lawmakers-again-file-bill-declaring-supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-ruling-void-in-state/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Two lawmakers in Tennessee have again filed a bill that declares the State’s intent to only recognize “natural marriage” and consider “void” and “of no effect” the 2015 Obergefell Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex “marriage” nationwide.

According to The Tennessean, the “Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act” has been re-filed for the 2019 legislative session. Put forward by Sen. Mark Pody, R-Lebanon, and Rep. Jerry Sexton, R-Bean Station, the bill asserts state sovereignty on the issue of marriage and proclaims that the Supreme Court “is not the sole and final arbiter of the powers of the states.”

“[T]he United States Supreme Court is not infallible, and has issued lawless decisions which are repulsive to the Constitution and natural law,” it declares, noting the cases of Scott v. Sandford, Buck v. Bell, Korematsu v. United States and Roe v. Wade, as well as Obergefell v. Hodges.

The bill also points to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which a number of states refused to follow, along with the Scott decision, “as they were a violation of the rule of law and of natural law.”

It cites the Virginia Resolution of December 24, 1798, which said that the states “have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights, and liberties appertaining to them.”

The legislation additionally quotes from Sir William Blackstone, whose Commentaries on the Common Law were used by attorneys and the courts throughout early America. Blackstone taught that a man’s rights come from God, and that all law must be based on God’s law.

“[The] law of nature, being coeval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is, of course, superior in any obligation to any other,” Blackstone stated. “It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this.”

The Blackstone Institute outlines that “[i]t was only in the mid-Twentieth Century that American law, being re-written by the U. S. Supreme Court, repudiated Blackstone.”

The bill, therefore, declares that “[n]atural marriage between one (1) man and one (1) woman as recognized by the people of Tennessee remains the law in Tennessee, regardless of any court decision to the contrary. Any court decision purporting to strike down natural marriage, including Obergefell v. Hodges is unauthoritative, void, and of no effect.”

The Tennessee Marriage Protection Amendment, put before voters in 2006 to add an amendment to the state Constitution affirming that “the relationship of one man and one woman shall be the only legally recognized marital contract in this state,” passed with 81 percent of the vote. Pody and Sexton believe that the will of the people should be upheld.

This will be the fourth year that Pody and Sexton have filed their Natural Marriage Defense Act, as attempts for passage in 2016, 2017 and 2018 were unsuccessful. Sexton told The Tennessean that while he is unsure if the bill has a greater chance this time, there are some new faces in the legislature that might be sympathetic to the effort.

“I think we’re probably a more conservative legislature now than we have been, but that remains to be seen,” he said.

2 Chronicles 9:16 reads, “And [he] said to the judges, ‘Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the Lord, who is with you in the judgment.’”

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION LIFTS FEDERAL OBAMA TRANSGENDER BATHROOM GUIDANCE

 

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION LIFTS TRANSGENDER BATHROOM GUIDANCE

 BY Maria Danilova and Sadie Gurman

SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/trump-nixes-trans-bathrooms/;

 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

 WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Wednesday ended federal 
protection for transgender students that required schools to allow them 
to use bathrooms and locker rooms matching their gender identities, 
stepping into an emotional national issue.

The administration came down on the side of states’ rights, lifting 
federal guidelines that had been issued by the Obama administration. 
Without the Obama directive, it will be up to states and school 
districts to interpret federal anti-discrimination law and determine 
whether students should have access to restrooms in accordance with 
their expressed gender identity and not just their biological sex.

“This is an issue best solved at the state and local level,” Education 
Secretary Betsy DeVos said. “Schools, communities, and families can find
 — and in many cases have found — solutions that protect all students.”

The Obama guidance did not sufficiently explain how federal sex 
discrimination law known as Title IX also applies to gender identity, 
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement.

“Congress, state legislatures and local governments are in a position to
 adopt appropriate policies or laws addressing this issue,” Sessions 
said.

In a letter to the nation’s schools, the Justice and Education 
departments said the earlier guidance “has given rise to significant 
litigation regarding school restrooms and locker rooms.”

The agencies withdrew the guidance to “in order to further and more completely 

consider the legal issues involved.”

Anti-bullying safeguards would not be affected by the change, according 
to the letter. “All schools must ensure that all students, including 
LGBT students, are able to learn and thrive in a safe environment,” it 
said.

It was not clear what immediate impact the change would have on schools,
 as a federal judge in Texas put a temporary hold on the Obama guidance 
soon after it was issued — after 13 states sued.

Even without that hold, the guidance carried no force of law. But 
transgender rights advocates say it was useful and necessary to protect 
students from discrimination. Opponents argued it was federal overreach 
and violated the safety and privacy of other students.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said President Donald Trump “has made 
it clear throughout the campaign that he is a firm believer in states’ 
rights and that certain issues like this are not best dealt with at the 
federal level.”

Conservative activists hailed the change, saying the Obama directives 
were illegal and violated the rights of fixed-gender students, 
especially girls who did not feel safe changing clothes or using 
restrooms next to anatomical males.

“Our daughters should never be forced to share private, intimate spaces 
with male classmates, even if those young men are struggling with these 
issues,” said Vicki Wilson, a member of Students and Parents for 
Privacy. “It violates their right to privacy and harms their dignity.”

However, the reversal is a setback for transgender rights groups, which 
had been urging Trump to keep the guidelines in place. Advocates say 
federal law will still prohibit discrimination against students based on
 their gender or sexual orientation.

Still, they say lifting the Obama directive puts children in harm’s way.

“Reversing this guidance tells trans kids that it’s OK with the Trump 
administration and the Department of Education for them to be abused and
 harassed at school for being trans,” said American Federation of 
Teachers President Randi Weingarten.

Activists protested the move Wednesday outside the White House. “Respect 

existence or expect resistance,” read one placard.

Spicer denied media reports that DeVos, who has been criticized for her 
stance on LGBT issues, had opposed the change but was overruled by 
Sessions. Spicer said any disagreement was merely over wording and 
timing.

“There is no daylight between anybody,” Spicer said, adding that DeVos was 

“100 percent” on board with the decision.

The Obama administration’s guidance was based on its determination that 
Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education, 
also applies to gender identity.

While not legally binding, the guidance sent a warning that schools could lose 

funding if they did not comply.

Republicans pushed back, arguing that the federal effort was an example 
of Obama administration meddling in state and local matters. Texas Lt. 
Gov. Dan Patrick equated it to blackmail and said his state was ready to
 forfeit federal education money rather than comply.

Legal experts said the change in position could impact pending court 
cases involving the federal sex discrimination law, including a case to 
be heard by the Supreme Court in March involving Gavin Grimm, a 
transgender teen who was denied bathroom access in Virginia.

The justices could decide not to hear the case and direct lower courts to decide 

that issue.

In a phone interview with the AP, Grimm said of the Trump action: “It’s 
not positive. It has the possibility of hurting transgender students and
 transgender people. We’re going to keep fighting like we have been and 
keep fighting for the right thing.”

A patchwork of state laws could continue to emerge as a result of the 
change. Fifteen states have explicit protections for transgender 
students in their state laws, and many individual school districts in 
other states have adopted policies that cover such students on the basis
 of their gender identity, said Sarah Warbelow, legal director of the 
Human Rights Campaign. Just one state, North Carolina, has enacted a law
 restricting access to bathrooms in government-owned buildings to the 
sex that appears on a person’s birth certificate. Lawmakers in more than
 10 states are considering similar legislation, according to the 
National Conference of State Legislatures.

"SANCTUARY CITIES" CLOSED: TEXAS FORMALLY WITHDRAWS FROM "REFUGEE" RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM

 TEXAS FORMALLY WITHDRAWS FROM "REFUGEE" RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM 

SANCTUARY CITIES CLOSE TO WOULD BE JIHADISTS

Published on Sep 30, 2016

According to law, Texas must give 120 days' notice meaning its involvement will end on January 31, 2017. At that time, the federal government will have to find a non-profit group to run the program in Texas.

WILL THE GLOBALIST/SOCIALIST POPE MAKE SURE CATHOLIC CHARITIES GETS THE FUNDING TO EXPAND THEIR "WORKS OF MERCY" TO NULLIFY TEXAS, KANSAS, NEW JERSEY, AND OTHER STATES?

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION & UN ANNOUNCE GLOBAL POLICE FORCE TO FIGHT "EXTREMISM" IN U.S.~THAT IS: PATRIOTS, CONSTITUTIONALISTS, VETERANS, HOMESCHOOLERS, NON-COMPLIANT

NEW WORLD ORDER IS HERE

(WITH THE HELP OF STATIST DEMOCRATS & REPUBLICANS)

DICTATOR, CALIPHATE, "PASTOR IN CHIEF" 

ACCELERATES HIS DRACONIAN, ORWELLIAN NIGHTMARE

BY "STRONG", THEY MEAN OPPRESSIVE

"THE STRONG CITIES NETWORK": 

A GLOBALIST TAKEOVER OF AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY & FREEDOMS UNDER PRETENSE OF FIGHTING TERRORISM

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION & UN ANNOUNCE GLOBAL POLICE FORCE TO FIGHT 

"EXTREMISM" IN U.S. 

SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/obama-administration-and-un-announce-global-police-force-to-fight-extremism-in-u-s/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

breitbart.com

On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.

This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.

The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces?

After all, with Obama knowingly aiding al-Qaeda forces in Syria, how likely is it that he will use his “global police force” against actual Islamic jihadists? I suspect that instead, this global police force will be used to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia (Islamic law), and to silence all criticism of Islam for the President who proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

What is a global police force doing in our cities? This is exactly the abdication of American sovereignty that I warned about in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. The Obama Department of Justice made it clear that it was exactly that when it distributed a press release last week announcing the “Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism.” In that press release, the DoJ complained that “while many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”

So if the local and municipal effort to counter the euphemistic and disingenuous “violent extremism” is inadequate and hasn’t developed “systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale,” the feds – and the UN – have to step in. Thus the groundwork is being laid for federal and international interference down to the local level. “The Strong Cities Network,” Lynch declared, “will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration” – i.e., local dependence on federal and international authorities.

Lynch made the global (that is, United Nations) involvement clear when she added: “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”

This internationalist character was brought to the fore by the fact that the Strong Cities Network was launched on September 29 not at the White House or the Department of Homeland Security, or at the FBI headquarters or anywhere else that might be fitting for a national project, but at the United Nations.

Even more ominously, the DoJ press release says that the Strong Cities Network “will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities.” Sub-national and international: the press release then quotes Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo, Norway, a participant in the Strong Cities Network, saying: “To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance. To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders. The Strong Cities Network will enable cities across the globe pool our resources, knowledge and best practices together and thus leave us standing stronger in the fight against one of the greatest threats to modern society.”

But what is that greatest threat, exactly? Remember, the DoJ presser says that the SCN will “address violent extremism in all its forms.” It also says that it will aid initiatives that are working toward “building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.” “Building social cohesion” is a euphemism for keeping peace between non-Muslim and Muslim communities – mostly by making sure that non-Muslims don’t complain too loudly about, much less work against, rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the Islamization of their communities.

The DoJ presser noted that at the launch of the Strong Cities Network, “welcoming remarks” would be offered by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City. The involvement of New York City’s Marxist internationalist mayor is yet another warning sign.

TEXAS GOVERNOR ABBOTT CALLS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO RESTORE RULE OF LAW & TAKE BACK STATES' RIGHTS

"THE TEXAS PLAN"

http://gov.texas.gov/files/press-office/Restoring_The_Rule_Of_Law_01082016.pdf

"RESTORING THE RULE OF LAW WITH STATES LEADING THE WAY"

PRESS RELEASE: http://gov.texas.gov/news/press-release/21803

Governor Greg Abbott released the following statement in response to President Obama’s executive actions imposing gun control measures across the country.

“The Bill of Rights was added as a specific safeguard to prevent the federal government from denying Americans those guaranteed rights,” said Governor Abbott. “Today, the President trampled the purpose and substance of the Bill of Rights by unilaterally imposing Second Amendment restrictions. After failing to pass gun control measures through Congress, the President is yet again resorting to unilateral executive action in place of the democratic process. Despite the President’s latest attempt to undermine our liberty, Texas will take every action to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”

"I SUED BARACK OBAMA 31 TIMES"

TEXAS GOVERNOR ABBOTT CALLS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO RESTORE RULE OF LAW & TAKE BACK STATES' RIGHTS

SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/texas-governor-calls-for-constitutional-convention-to-restore-rule-of-law-take-back-states-rights/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Texas Governor Greg Abbott made good on his promise to challenge President Obama’s gun control initiatives Friday, calling for a Constitutional Convention of US states to create several new amendments aimed at reasserting states’ rights.

Among nine proposed amendments, “The Texas Plan” aims to prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one state. Another amendment requires Congress to balance its budget, and another allows a two-thirds majority of states to override a US Supreme Court decision.

“Congress is unable to control itself. So the people must impose control,” Governor Abbott said during a speech before the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

Abbott explained that federal lawmakers were out of step with the “Constitutional principles” our Founders put in place, and urged other states to join Texas in helping to “fix the cracks in our Constitution.”

“The increasingly frequent departures from Constitutional principles are destroying the Rule of Law foundation on which this country was built,”Abbott said, specifically citing President Obama’s recent executive authorizations infringing on the Second Amendment.

“We are succumbing to the caprice of man that our Founders fought to escape. The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. Instead, the states must lead the way. To do that I am adding another item to the agenda next session. I want legislation authorizing Texas to join other states in calling for a Convention of States to fix the cracks in our Constitution.”

Abbott’s declaration and 92-page proposal follows an appearance by the president in a televised town hall-style meeting hosted by CNN, in which the Commander-in-Chief attempted to convince Americans that executive orders infringing on the Second Amendment were a good idea.

Responding to the announcement, Abbott – a strong advocate for gun rights – promised, “Texas will take every action to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”

“The Bill of Rights was added as a specific safeguard to prevent the federal government from denying Americans those guaranteed rights,” Abbott said in a press release Tuesday. “Today, the President trampled the purpose and substance of the Bill of Rights by unilaterally imposing Second Amendment restrictions.”

The outspoken Republican governor made his intent to disobey executive orders imposed by the president clear over the weekend in a pointed tweet, challenging Obama to “Come and take it.”

______________________________________________________

Governor Abbott Unveils Texas Plan, 

Offers Constitutional Amendments 

To Restore The Rule Of Law

SEE: http://gov.texas.gov/news/press-release/21829; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Governor Greg Abbott today delivered the keynote address at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Annual Policy Orientation where he unveiled his Texas Plan to restore the Rule of Law and return the Constitution to its intended purpose. In his plan, Governor Abbott offers nine constitutional amendments to rein in the federal government and restore the balance of power between the States and the United States. The Governor proposes achieving the constitutional amendments through a Convention Of States.

“The increasingly frequent departures from Constitutional principles are destroying the Rule of Law foundation on which this country was built,” said Governor Abbott. “We are succumbing to the caprice of man that our Founders fought to escape. The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. Instead, the states must lead the way. To do that I am adding another item to the agenda next session. I want legislation authorizing Texas to join other states in calling for a Convention of States to fix the cracks in our Constitution.”

Governor Abbott went on to explain that dysfunction in Washington, D.C. stems largely from the federal government’s refusal to follow the Constitution. Congress routinely violates its enumerated powers, while taxing and spending its way from one financial crisis to another. The President exceeds his executive powers to impose heavy-handed regulations. And the Supreme Court imposes its policy views under the guise of judicial interpretation. Governor Abbott urged action by Texas – and other states – to restore the Rule of Law in America.

Governor Abbott offered the following constitutional amendments:

1. Prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one State.
2. Require Congress to balance its budget.
3. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from creating federal law.
4. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from preempting state law.
5. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
6. Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law.
7. Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution.
8. Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.
9. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a federal law or regulation.

_____________________________________________________

Texas Governor Calls for Constitutional Convention to Give Power Back to States

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/01/09/texas-governor-calls-for-constitutional-convention-to-give-power-back-to-states/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

AUSTIN, Texas — The governor of Texas has proposed a Constitutional Convention of States that would amend the U.S. Constitution in an effort to take back states’ rights and override federal decisions with a majority vote.

In an address on Friday, Gov. Greg Abbott, introduced what he called “The Texas Plan,” which seeks to strengthen founder’s original intent of the Tenth Amendment, which 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.”

“These increasingly frequent departures from Constitutional principles are destroying the rule of law foundation on which this country was built,” he stated. “We are succumbing to the caprice of man that our founders fought to escape. The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. They must come from the states.”

Abbott, a Roman Catholic, said that the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch have been abusing their powers for years.

“The irony for our generation is that the threat to our Republic doesn’t come just from foreign enemies, it comes, in part, from our very own leaders,” he stated.

The Constitutional Convention of States would be created under the authority of Article V of the U.S. Constitution, which states in part, “The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof…”

Abbott’s plan seeks to make seek to make nine amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which include allowing a two-thirds majority of the states to overturn a U.S. Supreme Court opinion, requiring a seven-justice “super majority” in the Supreme Court for decisions that would overturn a vote by the people, permitting a two-thirds majority of the states to override a federal law or regulation, and ensuring that the federal government does not step outside of the powers expressly delegated by the Constitution.

“[T]he entire structure of the Constitution was premised on the idea that the States would be stronger than the national government,” he wrote in a 70-page outline of the plan. “[T]he States must step up and lead; and thanks to the Founders’ prescience, the Constitution itself provides the path forward.”

If formed, the convention would be the first since 1787.
_______________________________________________________

Alex Jones & Texas Governor Challenge Obama On Gun Control

Published on Jan 11, 2016

Texas Governor Greg Abbott made good on his promise to challenge President Obama’s gun control initiatives Friday, calling for a Constitutional Convention of US states to create several new amendments aimed at reasserting states’ rights.http://www.infowars.com/texas-governo...