Another way to Nullify federal law.

ihopehefails

VIP Member
Oct 3, 2009
3,384
228
83
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.
 
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

Oh boy . . . .

Can you give an example of what you are talking about here?
 
There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute.


Such a law would immediately be found unconstitutional the minute it was appealed to a federal court. The state has no Constitutional authority to obstruct justice in a federal court.
 
Last edited:
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

Your premise (as I am trying to understand it) is: Since the United States Constitution provides that all prosecutions under federal law must be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place, a state could effectively nullify a federal law, by passing a state statute which provided that any person who sits on a jury that finds a person guilty of the federal statute the state wanted to nullify, would be subject to the same prison term as the person they found guilty.

As correctly mentioned, above - the Supremecy Clause would prevent anything like this from ever happening.

I would like to say nice try here but, somehow, I can't . . . .
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

Your premise (as I am trying to understand it) is: Since the United States Constitution provides that all prosecutions under federal law must be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place, a state could effectively nullify a federal law, by passing a state statute which provided that any person who sits on a jury that finds a person guilty of the federal statute the state wanted to nullify, would be subject to the same prison term as the person they found guilty.

As correctly mentioned, above - the Supremecy Clause would prevent anything like this from ever happening.

I would like to say nice try here but, somehow, I can't . . . .

I can't find anywhere in the constitution that says all federal laws are the supreme law of the land. Perhaps you can find some text that says all laws made in pursuence of the federal government are supreme? I will compare that to all laws made in pursueance of the constitution to see which one actually exist within the document itself.

I suppose the federal government can simply pass a law declaring that illegal but there are not restrictions found in the constitution that a state government can't pass that law. That kind of law would be illegal and unconstitutional.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #6
There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute.


Such a law would immediately be found unconstitutional the minute it was appealed to a federal court. The state has no Constitutional authority to obstruct justice in a federal court.

Why?
 
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

Your premise (as I am trying to understand it) is: Since the United States Constitution provides that all prosecutions under federal law must be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place, a state could effectively nullify a federal law, by passing a state statute which provided that any person who sits on a jury that finds a person guilty of the federal statute the state wanted to nullify, would be subject to the same prison term as the person they found guilty.

As correctly mentioned, above - the Supremecy Clause would prevent anything like this from ever happening.

I would like to say nice try here but, somehow, I can't . . . .

I can't find anywhere in the constitution that says all federal laws are the supreme law of the land. Perhaps you can find some text that says all laws made in pursuence of the federal government are supreme? I will compare that to all laws made in pursueance of the constitution to see which one actually exist within the document itself.

I suppose the federal government can simply pass a law declaring that illegal but there are not restrictions found in the constitution that a state government can't pass that law. That kind of law would be illegal and unconstitutional.

The Supremacy Clause is a clause in the United States Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2. The clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The text establishes these as the highest form of law in the American legal system, mandating that state judges uphold them, even if state laws or constitutions conflict. (from Wiki)
 
There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute.


Such a law would immediately be found unconstitutional the minute it was appealed to a federal court. The state has no Constitutional authority to obstruct justice in a federal court.

Why?


Seriously? Because intimidation of a federal juror is a federal crime and federal law trumps state.
 
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

they are far nicer to you than you deserve, nutbar.

You've been told repeatedly that the supremacy clause makes federal law controlling over state law.

that means, for the IQ impaired like you, that the state cannot do anything to impede federal law.

Get it? Or do we need to speak more slowly for you?

now carry on with your trolling.

:cuckoo:
 
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

Oh boy! I love it when someone tries to play shithouse lawyer!
 
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

they are far nicer to you than you deserve, nutbar.

You've been told repeatedly that the supremacy clause makes federal law controlling over state law.

that means, for the IQ impaired like you, that the state cannot do anything to impede federal law.

Get it? Or do we need to speak more slowly for you?

now carry on with your trolling.

:cuckoo:

I like how will of thought seems to trump reason with you as "you've been told"
 
Your premise (as I am trying to understand it) is: Since the United States Constitution provides that all prosecutions under federal law must be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place, a state could effectively nullify a federal law, by passing a state statute which provided that any person who sits on a jury that finds a person guilty of the federal statute the state wanted to nullify, would be subject to the same prison term as the person they found guilty.

As correctly mentioned, above - the Supremecy Clause would prevent anything like this from ever happening.

I would like to say nice try here but, somehow, I can't . . . .

I can't find anywhere in the constitution that says all federal laws are the supreme law of the land. Perhaps you can find some text that says all laws made in pursuence of the federal government are supreme? I will compare that to all laws made in pursueance of the constitution to see which one actually exist within the document itself.

I suppose the federal government can simply pass a law declaring that illegal but there are not restrictions found in the constitution that a state government can't pass that law. That kind of law would be illegal and unconstitutional.

The Supremacy Clause is a clause in the United States Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2. The clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The text establishes these as the highest form of law in the American legal system, mandating that state judges uphold them, even if state laws or constitutions conflict. (from Wiki)

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

All laws made in pursuance of the constitution are the supreme law of the land not all laws created by the federal government.
 
I can't find anywhere in the constitution that says all federal laws are the supreme law of the land. Perhaps you can find some text that says all laws made in pursuence of the federal government are supreme? I will compare that to all laws made in pursueance of the constitution to see which one actually exist within the document itself.

I suppose the federal government can simply pass a law declaring that illegal but there are not restrictions found in the constitution that a state government can't pass that law. That kind of law would be illegal and unconstitutional.

The Supremacy Clause is a clause in the United States Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2. The clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The text establishes these as the highest form of law in the American legal system, mandating that state judges uphold them, even if state laws or constitutions conflict. (from Wiki)

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

All laws made in pursuance of the constitution are the supreme law of the land not all laws created by the federal government.

"and the Laws of the United States" = federal law. Sorry it's not in 2010 language for you. That's why people get paid to interpret it...after they've been to law school.
 
All laws made in pursuance of the constitution are the supreme law of the land not all laws created by the federal government.

Ihope, are you old enough to remember "All In The Family"? Remember Edith? Remember what Archie used to call her? Remember why he used to call her that?

I don't know why I am reminded of that now . . .
 
All laws made in pursuance of the constitution are the supreme law of the land not all laws created by the federal government.

Ihope, are you old enough to remember "All In The Family"? Remember Edith? Remember what Archie used to call her? Remember why he used to call her that?

I don't know why I am reminded of that now . . .

[youtube]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0d8FTPv955I&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0d8FTPv955I&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]
 
All laws made in pursuance of the constitution are the supreme law of the land not all laws created by the federal government.

Ihope, are you old enough to remember "All In The Family"? Remember Edith? Remember what Archie used to call her? Remember why he used to call her that?

I don't know why I am reminded of that now . . .

[youtube]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0d8FTPv955I&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0d8FTPv955I&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]

"Didn't need no welfare state, Everybody pulled his weight, Gee our old LaSalle ran great, those were the days . . . "

Sound familiar? I loved "All in the Family." Archie was such a typical conservative - even for today. Totally unaware of how much of a bigotted, intolerant person he actually was.
 
Here is an interesting way to nullify a federal law. The constitution says that all prosecutions of us citizens is to be done by a jury and in the state where the crime took place. There can be a state law that says that any citizen that finds another citizen guilty of what the state is trying to nullify then that person must do as much time in jail as the person they helped to prosecute. If they send someone to jail for ten years then they do ten years in state prison. This forces the jury to declare someone not guilty for that federal prosectution which will then nullify that federal law in that state.

:eusa_eh:


:eusa_think:



:eusa_think:



:wtf:
 

Forum List

Back
Top