This would be funny if it weren’t so pathetic.
While advocates of Texas secession may have stalled with their online petition efforts, state lawmakers have filed numerous bills objecting to major White House initiatives and suggesting the state doesn’t have to abide them.
Newly elected Sen. Donna Campbell, R-San Antonio, has filed a constitutional amendment that bars state agencies from enforcing penalties incurred by not purchasing health insurance, as mandated by the federal Affordable Care Act. Similar legislation by Rep. Jonathan Stickland, R-Bedford, would give a state tax break to businesses that face federal penalties for failing to cover contraception in their health plans, as required by the federal law. And numerous legislators have filed legislation prohibiting enforcement of any new federal regulations that might be imposed on gun ownership.
All told, the legislation indicates that a major theme of the overwhelmingly Republican Texas Legislature will be signaling its disapproval of the Obama administration.
“I am very concerned about the federal government’s rapid expansion and attempts to impose its will on the states,” Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said in a statement supporting Campbell’s constitutional amendment. “Here in Texas we will never concede our freedom to Washington.”
But to South Texas College of Law constitutional law professor Charles Rhodes, the anti-federal-government proposals amount to “political grandstanding.”
“It is eminently clear that, under the Supremacy Clause that was part of our Constitution when the states ratified it, that the federal government is supreme,” he said. “It’s been our constitutional basis for 200 years.”
For people who claim to revere the Constitution, they sure are ignorant of it. All they’re doing is creating future lawsuits for Greg Abbott to lose. Of course, given all the other things they could be doing this session, that’s about as productive a use of their time I can think of. Keep up the good work, y’all.
Ah, the “it keeps them out of further mischief” theory.
Printz v. US established that local law enforcement officials can’t be forced to enforce federal law. That’s not to say that Congress can’t choose to withhold funding if the locals don’t enforce the law, but they can’t be held accountable otherwise.
Pingback: We could do something to make voting easier if we wanted to – Off the Kuff