The “Show Me” state has shown us an excellent example of state nullification. Missouri House Bill 1039 and its companion Missouri Senate Bill 367, known as the” Second Amendment Preservation Act”, are more than just a stand for the Second Amendment, but for the idea of state sovereignty. In the language of these bills we see important questions asked. Does the Constitution mean what it says or not? Is the agreement between the states a binding compact or putty in the hands of an ever growing federal government? In this article, I will focus on the House Bill.
The Rationale
The general assembly of the state of Missouri is firmly resolved to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against every aggression, whether foreign or domestic, and is duty bound to oppose every infraction of those principles which constitute the basis of the Union of the States, because only a faithful observance of those principles can secure the nation’s existence and the public happiness;
Every legislative, executive, and judicial officer, both state and federal, must swear or affirm to support the Constitution of the United States (Article VI, Clause 3). Here we see the general assembly of the state of Missouri is also resolved to support and defend the Constitution as well. We think about foreign aggression, but what about domestically? What are we to do if those within our own government are acting in ways contrary to the principles found within the Constitution? If we cannot observe the principles of the Constitution, then this experiment in self-government truly has failed.
Acting through the Constitution of the United States, the people of the several states created the federal government to be their agent in the exercise of a few defined powers, while reserving to the state governments the power to legislate on matters which concern the lives, liberties, and properties of citizens in the ordinary course of affairs;
The limitation of the federal government’s power is affirmed under Amendment X of the Constitution of the United States, which defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people of the several states to the federal government, and all power not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States is reserved to the states respectively or to the people themselves;
If the federal government assumes powers that the people did not grant it in the Constitution of the United States, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force;
…
If the government, created by a compact among the states, was the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers granted to it by the states through the Constitution of the United States, the federal government’s discretion, and not the Constitution of the United States, would necessarily become the measure of those powers.
It seems many have forgotten that it was We The People who created the federal government and we defined its powers and set the limits of its authority. The Missouri general assembly reminds us of this fact. They also remind us that, contrary to popular belief, the federal government is not all powerful. Any acts that are contrary to the Constitution are void and have no legal force, or at least they shouldn’t. But what are we to do? How do we stand up to a federal government when it acts beyond its legal limits?
To the contrary, as in all other cases of compacts among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself as to if infractions of the compact have occurred, as well as to determine the mode and measure of redress. Although the several states have granted supremacy to laws and treaties made under the powers granted in the Constitution of the United States, such supremacy does not extend to various federal statutes, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, regulations, or other actions which restrict or prohibit the manufacture, ownership, and use of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition exclusively within the borders of Missouri; such statutes, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, regulations, and other actions exceed the powers granted to the federal government except to the extent they are necessary and proper for governing and regulating land and naval forces of the United States or for organizing, arming, and disciplining militia forces actively employed in the service of the United States Armed Forces;
The federal government, as a creation of the Constitution, is neither its judge nor a party to it. To give the federal government unchecked authority to determine its powers would place it above the Constitution. This common misunderstanding of the Constitution and the government it created is a large part of the reason for the ever expanding and tyrannical government coming out of Washington, D.C. As a party to the compact, the general assembly of Missouri notes that they have a right to judge when an infraction of the compact has occurred and what to do about it. Recognizing that the federal government has no legal authority to regulate arms within the borders of a state, except as part of the armed forces of the nation, Missouri’s general assembly goes on to further explain their position,
The people of Missouri have vested the general assembly with the authority to regulate the manufacture, possession, exchange, and use of firearms within the borders of this state, subject only to the limits imposed by Amendment II of the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Missouri; and
The general assembly of the state of Missouri strongly promotes responsible gun ownership, including parental supervision of minors in the proper use, storage, and ownership of all firearms; the prompt reporting of stolen firearms; and the proper enforcement of all state gun laws. The general assembly of the state of Missouri hereby condemns any unlawful transfer of firearms and the use of any firearm in any criminal or unlawful activity.
The people of Missouri have vested the power to regulate firearms within their state to their general assembly and not the federal government. The people of the several states did not vest the federal government with the authority to regulate the possession, sale, or exchange of firearms within a state. Neither did they authorize Congress to collect taxes or create laws beyond their authority as defined by the Constitution. It is the state legislatures that have this authority, within the bounds described by the Second Amendment. So what are they going to do about it?
All federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, and regulations, regardless if enacted before or after the provisions of sections 1.410 to 1.485, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by Amendment II to the Constitution of the United States and Article I, Section 23 of the Constitution of Missouri shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.
The state of Missouri identifies federal acts that are infringements not only on the people’s right to keep and bear arms, but on their state’s sovereignty. They then declare that any federal act in violation of Missouri law that infringes on the people’s right to keep and bear arms is null and void and of no effect within their state. The general assembly then puts some teeth behind this.
1.440. It shall be the duty of the courts and law enforcement agencies of this state to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms within the borders of this state and to protect these rights from the infringements defined under section 1.420.
1.450. No person, including any public officer or employee of this state or any political subdivision of this state, shall have the authority to enforce or attempt to enforce any federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, regulations, statutes, or ordinances infringing on the right to keep and bear arms as described under section 1.410.
1.460.3. Sovereign, official, or qualified immunity shall not be an affirmative defense in such actions.
It will be the duty of Missouri courts and law enforcement to protect the rights of their citizens to keep and bear arms. No officer or employee of the state or its subdivisions will have the authority to enforce federal laws that infringe on their citizens’ right to keep and bear arms. And no claim of immunity shall be a defense against legal actions taken in regard to this legislation.
Notice that it is the duty of Missouri courts and law enforcement to protect their citizens’ rights, even against federal infringement. Should this bill become law and a public official violates a citizen’s right protected by this legislation, even the protection of “I was just doing my job” will not be a defense. The person violating Missouri law can be held individually accountable, even when acting under orders.
Conclusion
Here we see that general assembly of the State of Missouri picking up their responsibility to protect the rights of their citizens, protect the sovereignty of their state, and to remediate violations of the Constitution to which they are a party. Maybe it’s time for the citizens of the other 49 states to start hiring state representatives who will pick up this responsibility as well. We’ve all been taught about checks and balances between the three branches of the federal government, but we have not been taught about those established between the states and the federal government. It’s about time we see these checks reinstated and balance returned to the governing of this nation.
I now wait with anticipation to see if the legislature of Missouri will fulfill this promise, pass this legislation into law, and ultimately enforce it. I wish the people of Missouri Godspeed, and if push comes to shove, I pledge my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor to help you defend your rights.
