Extra usless fact trivia points if you know where that came from.

Well, it comes down to Federalism in the face of socialism. The implication of the states and the Fed. gov’t being co-sovereign are that the states can assert their legitimate authority, but so can the Fed. gov’t; if a state or the states were to attempt to override a legitimate exercise of federal power, they would be in the wrong and the Fed. gov’t in the right.

Nullification is not specifically outlined in the Constitution, but it’s an issue of two and two is four; if the states have sovereignty, then they have the power to assert that sovereignty, but only with in the bounds in which they are sovereign.

I look forward to you e-mail; david.marcoe at modernconservative dot com

So this really all comes down to the age old Federalist vesus anti-Federalist argument then?

Also I’m going to try and email you later regarding your health plan idea you had mentioned in yesterday’s open thread. With my healthcare experience and knowledge I might be able to help you refine it a bit and avoid some of the pitfalls and loop holes that can inadvertently be opened up with high risk pooling.

Well, I am working on a Weather Control Device.

The states are co-sovereign entities to the Federal government under the Constitution. As such, they have spheres of authority that the Fed. gov’t shouldn’t be able to touch. The 10th Amendment–which is all over the map, with differing interpretations by scholars–does at least reinforce this conclusion. In short, Tennessee may have grounds to nullify it. Texas has threatened it. Other states may follow suit if that happens. The only grounds on which the Fed’ gov’t can pass the legislation is under the Commerce Clause, but unless you ignore it entirely and make up something in its place, the Commerce Clause does not give them the power to do so. Under that argument, every state might have the right to nullify it.