 Okay, James Madison, in the case of deliberate, palpable and dangerous exercise of powers, other powers not granted, the states have the right and are in duty bound to interpose. Why are they in our duty bound to interpose? Because the power belongs to them. They simply delegated to it. They've created the federal government. It is the duty of the states to maintain the creation within its created limits. Otherwise, the creation becomes superior to the creator. In a position, Jefferson called it nullification of the other authorized acts of federal government. Notice he didn't say the lawsuit. Nullification. What is nullification? That is the states and the people proclaiming. The federal government is not our master. The states and the people are the masters of the Constitution. We do not have to and we will not comply. It does not require a lawsuit. It simply requires a declaration that the car belongs to us. We have the tribal deed. You have no authority to steal this car from us and sell it. And we will not allow you to do that. Jefferson says it's the rightful remedy that the several states who formed the Constitution, being sovereign and independent, like France, Spain and Italy, have the questionable right to judge of its infractions. And that a nullification by those soventies, who are the soventies? Of all authorized acts done under the color of that instrument is the rightful remedy. Some will say no to nullification. Why? They'll tell you it's not in the Constitution. They'll tell you the Supreme Court says nullification is not lawful. They'll tell you the supremacy clause prohibits it. But those who lived it said to disallow nullification would be an unconstitutional act of tyranny. The doctor which denies to the states the right of protecting their reserved powers. Isn't that what the 10th amendment says? Which would vest in the general government. Now this parenthetical is very, very important. He says it matters not through which department. How many branches of government do we have? Legislative, executive and judicial, right? So you're telling me the judicial branch is part of the federal government, right? Okay. Hang on to that. That's important. Because Calhoun is saying it doesn't matter whether it's the legislative, the executive or the judicial is going to assume this power. He says that is incompatible with the sovereignty of the states and the Constitution itself. The state remains sovereign as the 10th amendment declares, as the Declaration of Independence declares, as the Constitution declares, as the lead resolution declares. How can it retain sovereign if it does not retain its power? If the general government has whatever power it wants over the states. And if the general government has whatever power it wants to take, what is the purpose of the Constitution? See, to allow this transgression is completely contrary to the Constitution. Which means you have eliminated the basis for our federal union. So it's not in the Constitution. Well, yes it is. It's called the Ninth Amendment. The Numeration and the Constitution of Certain Rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. What you have to understand in interpreting this, what our framers wanted us to know, expected us to know, was there was a great debate over the incorporation of the Bill of Rights. There was a huge argument over this. We did not have a Bill of Rights when we ratified the Constitution. It was something that they debated over incorporating. Lee and James Madison leading the way for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights among other things, other people within specific provisions said we must have a Bill of Rights, Richard Henry Lee said, to be a sentinel for the people. In those unavoidable periods of inattentiveness, they knew through history that people would become pacified in prosperity. They would become lazy in luxury. And Richard Henry Lee is saying we must have this Bill of Rights to be a sentinel. What is a sentinel? A guardian and a watchman. Does the sentinel have the power to defeat an army at the door? It does not have the power. Sentinels only usually one or two guys, right? The sentinel is the alarm to awake the army, right? The Bill of Rights is not there to protect your rights. The Bill of Rights cannot protect your rights. Can the Bill of Rights pick up a pen and write your congressman? No. Can the Bill of Rights go sit in your congressman's office and demand that every law passed is compliant with the Constitution? Can the Bill of Rights pick up a sword? The Bill of Rights is not a protector of your rights. The Bill of Rights was incorporated to be a sentinel, to be an alarm. The problem is if you don't know what your rights are, it's a silent alarm. Quick, pop quiz, you ready? Don't answer this question out loud because you must have a personal assessment of the answer to this question. Close your pocket constitutions. No cheating. No mumbling, no whispering, no mouthing the answer because your neighbor must have an honest assessment. There are five individual protections in the First Amendment alone. Name all five. I know you can't. You'll have to admit you can only name four. Some will have to admit they can only name three and a crowd this size. It's possible we can only name two or one, some of you. My question is then, if you do not know what your rights are, how do you know they're not already gone? It's an alarm that becomes a silent alarm when you don't even know what your rights are. Hamilton said, if we incorporate these Bill of Rights, it's unnecessary and it will be dangerous. He said, why do we have to tell the government to not touch something that we've never delegated a power for them to touch? We've only delegated war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. Why do we have to tell them, he says, for example, why should we tell them not to infringe on our freedom of press when we've given them no authority to touch our press? He says, if we do this, one of two things will happen, if not both. One, the federal government will say, you've made us a list. It's a great list. We don't want to make sure that there was a list that we wouldn't touch. However, this press thing, it's a little vague. It's its own importance on the list. We have to know what press is. And Madison said, what you will do by telling them that they can't touch the press is give them the authority to regulate it through the definition of that word. He said, it's impossible to define press and eliminate its destruction. What you do is the government says, well, this is press. We won't touch it, but this is not press. It's the right to regulate it. Did you hear Dick Durbin say, just the under day? Well, you know, we know what press, we know what a journalist is. We know that Fox and AP, they're journalists. But is a blogger a journalist? Is a tweeter a journalist? He says, we need to ask 21st century questions about a provision that was placed in the Constitution over 200 years ago. You know what, I'm sorry, Dick. It's the first amendment, and I don't need to be a government approved journalist to get protection. But the very thing that Madison was warning, that Hamilton was warning about is it's coming before us. The other thing that will happen is this. The government will say it's on the list. You've made this list. It's a great list. We won't touch anything on that list. However, that one's not on the list. Nullification isn't in the Constitution, so it must not be a protective right. You see, Madison's solution to this great debate was the 9th amendment. He says, I can solve this problem in the ratification debates. He says, I can solve this problem that Hamilton has with the Constitution, with the Bill of Rights. We can put this in there. What does it mean? The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. They all belong to us whether they're on the list or not. That's what the 9th amendment says. Not only that, if it's on the list, you can't do anything to it. You can't define it away. You can't regulate it away. Sam Adams says, among the natural rights of the colonists are these. First, a right to learn. Secondly, liberty. Thirdly, to property. Together with the right to support and defend them. Nullification is a natural right. Nullification is your right to support and defend life, liberty, and property. And it's right there in the 9th amendment. Say that and leave it. Right now? When we get back? Some will tell you the Supreme Court has the final say. But Jefferson and Madison disagree. Jefferson says, the idea that the general government is the exclusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it stop nothing short of despotism. If the Constitution is not the limitation of the powers of the general government, that's despotism. Why? Because he says the discretion of those who administer the government and not the Constitution will be the measure of their powers. The Constitution will longer be the limiting document that it was meant to be. It will only be left to the will of the sovereign. It's from Madison because Madison gets right to the point here. And this, Sheriff, you're going to love this one. Okay? Love this one. If the decision of the judiciary be raised above the authority of the sovereign parties to the Constitution, who are the sovereign parties to the Constitution? If the judiciary be raised above the states, dangerous powers not delegated, may not only be usurped and executed by other departments, but that the judicial department also may exercise or sanction dangerous powers beyond the grant of the Constitution. Do you know that Justice Scalia just this last week issued an opinion that says your regulatory agencies have the ultimate power to decide their own jurisdiction? That the courts have no say in that at all? He checked themselves out, which means now the EPA has unlimited authority to get in your house because they now have the unlimited authority to determine their own jurisdiction. That is a sanction of dangerous powers. But he says this. The ultimate right of the parties to the Constitution. Who are the parties to the Constitution? To judge whether the compact has been dangerously violated must extend to violations by one delegated authority, as well as by another, by the judiciary as well as by the executive or legislative. Is there any question that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the Constitution? Who is the ultimate arbiter of the Constitution? The states. The supremacy clause prohibits it. Now, this is my favorite argument because it's the easiest to knock down. The other ones are really easy, but this is just a matter of literacy. Hamilton says in Federalist Paper 8 in 78, no legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. I know we like to redefine the meaning of the word is, but you can't get much simpler than no legislative act. Contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. He says, deny this would affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal, that the servant is above his master and the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves. Don't they believe that? Who created the Constitution? Who created the Constitution? The states did. Who created the general government? So, if the states are made inferior to the general government, isn't that the creation becoming superior to the creator? Don't we have a classification for that? Frankenstein, right? I'm getting a time signal. Here we go. Ready? The Supremacy Clause. The Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuits thereof shall be the supreme law of the land. No legislative act, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid because the Supremacy Clause says in and of itself the only way is the supreme law of the land is that if it is made in pursuits of the Constitution, you have to be illiterate not to understand that. That's why Hamilton said no legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. Is that what you wanted? Do you understand now who created this Constitution? You understand they created a limited and defined general government. Who is the creator of the Constitution? Who is the ultimate authority for the power? The people have all the power to be delegated to the states. The states delegated power to the federal government to be an agent for them. The federal government is an employee of the states. And when your states refuse to make their employees do their job, you now have that authority. How can we get the president to quit making so many executive orders? How do we get the president to quit making so many executive orders? You get your states to refuse to enforce them. He can make executive orders like pets, candy, all he wants. They have no authority. He's stealing your car. He's got no authority to sell it. You just simply have to say we own the title deed and it's not valid here. Simply not valid. War, peace, negotiation, foreign commerce, that's all your federal government's supposed to be doing. Is healthcare in that? Is the environment in that? No, no. Is education in that? No, no. Is the Department of Transportation in that? No. Energy? Four years. Four services. Is the federal government authorized to do any of those things? Let me ask you something. When you take money from the federal government to do those things, you are relinquishing your authority. Does the federal government have any right to be in your sheriff's department? No. Don't take their federal money. You are becoming addicted to the government. Is there one that's more important? Yes. The Ninth Amendment is your most important amendment in the Bill of Rights because it is your title deed to absolutely everything. It gives you that ultimate authority. And not only that, it describes how the entire Constitution is to be interpreted. Second then would be the tenth amendment. One quick one. What is the seventeenth amendment due to this contract? The seventeenth amendment. How many of you know what the seventeenth amendment is? All right. Prior to the seventeenth amendment, our senators were hired by the states to represent the states. Your senators represent the states, which is why there are two senators for every state. How many of your senators realize their primary job description is to fence on the tenth amendment? What we did, the progressives of 1912. Do you know who the leader of the progressive of 1912 was? Teddy Roosevelt. The loved Republican president, Teddy Roosevelt, was the leader of the progressives of 1912 in which they perpetrated a lie on the people that the seventeenth amendment needed to have won. You see, prior to the seventeenth amendment, the senators were hired, appointed by the state legislators. There was no general election, which meant if the senators did not do their job, they were fired on the spot. There was no recall election. There was no nothing. They were at-will employees. Our framers called this the power of automatic recall. When we ratified the seventeenth amendment, we changed over to a popular election cycle, which gave them guaranteed tenure for at least six years. Our framers gave us automatic recall for a specific purpose. Richard Henry Lee tells us that purpose. The purpose was to keep special interest groups and lobbyists out of the federal government. When we moved to a direct election of our senators, meaning the people only had power to influence their senators once every six years instead of every single day their job being on the line, when we checked out, the special interest groups and lobbyists checked in. And that's why we're now controlled by special interest groups and lobbyists, because we believed a lie and exchanged our power for sleep. We're trying to move over to Charles and Steve, and we want to really hear from them, and we're going to try to save some questions for all of us at the last 15 minutes. I'm going to go about 10 now, and I'm going to give 10 to Charles, and we're going to just do body questions. What I hand to you is a copy of the Supreme Court decision where seven sheriffs are against the federal government. The two that ended up in the federal government. It was about what you do to me. You know, I swear, she's like having another wife for us. You're a more like a man than a woman. This is now for Christianity. Matt friends, when Scalia talks about jewels, spheres, one sphere is really before enumerated, you talked about war peace. But it's also a very small sphere. Correct. And so that's the voice he never made. But they're not. One is the universe, because it's everywhere. Correct. I even say that in my presentation. The two spheres that Scalia addressed in here, he just didn't reinforce the size that they're supposed to be. They're not even. Right, right. Yeah. So what Krasan just said, I mean, there's only these enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8, and every sheriff needs to be familiar with that, because you have to defend your jurisdiction against anything outside Article 1, Section 8. So the federal government goes out those 17 assignments that dealt with war, and say it again, War peace negotiation and foreign conflict. That's all they get. And there are 17 things that are listed in Article 1, Section 8 that are out for those four things to happen. Anything outside that, you as a sheriff, it's war and constitutional guard. You have to stop it. Correct. And so that's what state sovereignty is. That's the only way. What did I show yesterday? The two words. What were the two words I showed? I told you not to forget that all of this is rendered express. Okay. Now that rendered express is in this little book you have. This is a highlighted version of the Supreme Book. Okay. Okay, good. Now, nine commandments. Scalia wrote this decision, and I've always loved him for what he did in this, but he's wrong so much as not even one. And he was wrong a couple of times in this decision because he said the state surrenders powers to the federal government. What does the 10th Amendment say the states did? Delegated. Delegated. Delegated. Which means, like Crescent just pointed out, that we're the boss. If I get to delegate to you, I'm your boss. You blew it, so I delegate it to we. We're here. That's his name. So, that makes me the boss. So I'm delegated to the federal government. Some assignments, they screw it up. What do I do? I can take it back and protect my own headquarters. Right. And yet, no legal has permission from their courts and say, oh, G, I wonder why we lost that one. No, stop going to court and start doing it. Just start erecting the barriers. Now, what I'm giving this award is so that you read, there's a lot of these mainstream sheriff's skills and some of the mainstream legislators still that want to think that the Supreme Court has a court of 40 and that it has to go to court. It already has. You don't have to go to court again. A couple of dumb sheriffs, one from Montana, these 90 little sheriffs, one from Arizona, one from Montana, Prince, went all the way to the Supreme Court on this issue that they can't tell me what to do because, as she just pointed out, we're the boss. Got to mention that the question with this lesson is your ultimate shield. You can go to my website and get a written copy of this. It's a primer that I call Haltification Part 1 and Part 2. Print it out. It's five pages. It's not really big.