Wisconsin AB203: The National Guard and the Constitution 

Wisconsin AB203: The National Guard and the Constitution  | Tenth Amendment Center

Under the radar in most spheres until now, Wisconsin Assembly Bill 203 (introduced in April, 2009) seeks to restore a Constitutional balance to the common practice of federalizing the national guard.

AB203 “requires the governor to examine every federal order that places the Wisconsin national guard on federal active duty to determine if that order is lawful and valid. If the governor determines that the federal order is not lawful or valid, the bill requires the governor to take appropriate action, which may include commencing legal action in state or federal court, to prevent the Wisconsin national guard from being placed on federal active duty.”

The bill also “requires the governor to submit to the appropriate standing committees of the legislature a summary of the governor’s review of every federal order that places the Wisconsin national guard on federal active duty and any action he or she takes in response to that review.”

The Guard considers its charter to be the Constitution of the United States, and specifically mentions Article I, Section 8, Clause 15:

Clause 15 provides that the Congress has three constitutional grounds for calling up the militia — “to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrection and repel invasions.” All three standards appear to be applicable only to the Territory of the United States.

Read the full text of the Bill below:

via Wisconsin AB203: The National Guard and the Constitution | Tenth Amendment Center.

Post to Twitter

Share

Filed Under: Crime, Legal Issues

Tags:

RSSComments (0)

Trackback URL

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • TH100We are subsidizing our own destruction. The fossil fuel industry is cashing in on government welfare. According to a new report from Oil Change International, the oil, gas, and coal industries raked in $21.6 billion dollars in state and federal subsidies in 2013 alone. In comparison, the entire 2013 budget request for the Department of Labor was only $12 billion dollars, and the Environmental Protection Agency only requested about $8 billion. We're giving the industry that destroys our planet more than two and half times the amount we pay to protect it. As EcoWatch.com points out, subsidies to fossil fuel companies are “particularly harmful and hypocritical.” The world's leading scientific institutions, including the International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, all say that the majority of fossil fuels must stay in the ground in order to prevent extreme global warming. One of this new report's authors said, “The science is clear that at least two-thirds of proven fossil fuel reserves need to stay in the ground to avoid catastrophic climate change – it is time for the U.S. government to show leadership and immediately end the massive subsidies that encourage their production.” Not only do these subsidies pad the pockets of oil companies, but they put tax payers on the hook for the social costs of destroying our planet. If Big Oil had to pay the true cost of fossil fuel extraction, they wouldn't be able to drill away without a second thought about the communities and the lives that they devastate in the process. It's time to demand that our government start making $20 billion dollar investments in our future, instead of subsidizing the very industries that are bringing about our destruction.
    (What do you think? Tell us here.)
  • LEGALIZE Democracy

    " We the corporations" On January 21, 2010, with its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are persons, entitled by the U.S. Constitution to buy elections and run our government. __________

    MOVE to AMEND

    a project of the CAMPAIGN TO LEGALIZE Democracy

    Help end Corporate personhood