The present Texas crisis, where the US Supreme Court decided that the Biden regime may cut a barrier fence to allow illegals to invade the country, raises acute legal and constitutional questions. The most pressing one is what happens when the highest court in the land gives a rogue, if not totally unbalanced decision? It seems unarguable to all but the open borders Left, wanting a neo-Marxist takeover of the countries of the West for a World government, that any decision allowing open borders is legally wrong, since it is an invitation to invasion.
But, isn't the Supreme Court the ultimate decision-maker? Conservatives seem to go weak at the knees when thinking about the courts, forgetting that the judges, and this applies to Australia as well, are unelected officials, who have been given the power to make law, with seemingly no accountability to the people. Thus, the High Court of Australia decided last year that even criminal illegals held in detention, who could not be deported, had to be released out on the streets! There is a pattern here, with the courts across the West having a pro-immigrant bias.
As detailed by Joseph Sansone, in the US there is one answer to rogue court decisions, and that is for the state to pass a law nullifying the Supreme Court decision. This has occurred in the past, when the state of Wisconsin passed a law, against the Supreme Court, and refused to return fugitive freed slaves back to their owners. Texas can pass a nullification law as well, which is something the Supreme Court deserves. In Australia, there is no such protection from rogue court decisions, and indeed, the states themselves are as rogue as can be. In the past the Founding Fathers did not consider the possibility of a type of social collapse and implosion of law and ethics occurring, where a powerful group seeks to destroy the entire basis of civilisation. But that is what we face now.
https://josephsansone.substack.com/p/texas-should-nullify-supreme-court
"When the Roman Empire was in decline, it had difficulty maintaining its borders from the barbarian hordes. True, they weren't all pillaging, many were migrating to escape other barbarians, but the Romans weren't able to repel or withstand the influx. The Romans ended up having many of these barbarians serve in the Roman Legions as mercenaries in exchange for citizenship. If it sounds a little familiar, it should, as some in Congress have been floating the idea of exchanging citizenship for military service for illegal aliens.
The United States of America is following a similar pattern; however, we are not experiencing an organic decline as the Romans did for various reasons. Instead, immigration and illegal immigration are one of many pieces of the puzzle in what is the deliberate destruction of the United States. The 1965 Immigration Act opened the doors to America and began a process of transformation. This ended what was basically a 50 year moratorium on immigration. This policy change coincided with an unofficial policy change of deliberately not securing the borders. On the surface, it gave corporatist Republicans cheap voters and Democrats a perpetual flow of an underclass vote. On a deeper level, this fueled a long term Marxist agenda to overthrow the United States as part of the Globalist agenda for World Government.
The United States Supreme Court is obviously held captive. The Supreme Court's recent ruling compelling Texas to allow U.S. border patrol agents to cut barb wire along the Texas Mexico border, is a treacherous act contrary to the United States Constitution and the continued existence of the country.
There is a simple Constitutional remedy called Nullification. The founding fathers believed in such a remedy as evidenced by the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions. An even more compelling example was when the State of Wisconsin nullified the United States Supreme Court decision. The state of Wisconsin passed a law and refused to return fugitive freed slaves back to their owners.
Governor Abbot should immediately call a special emergency session of the Texas legislature for the purpose of passing legislation nullifying the Supreme Court's decision. The state of Texas has a basic right to protect its border from a foreign invasion. There is absolutely no justification for the existence of the federal government if it refuses to protect the border and repel a foreign invasion.
Utterly ridiculous, the military can be dispersed throughout Washington DC, yet can't protect the border?
While they are at it, the Texas legislature should nullify the federal income tax for Texans, since the Federal Government has breached its contract and violated the terms of the compact called the United States Constitution, which created the United States. I digress…again…
Let's take a look at what Wisconsin did. The Joint Resolution of the Legislature of Wisconsin, March 19, 1859 reads as follows:
JOINT RESOLUTION relative to the decision of the United States supreme court, reversing decision of the supreme court of Wisconsin.
Whereas, the supreme court of the United States has assumed appellate jurisdiction in the matter of the petition of Sherman M. Booth for a writ of habeas corpus, presented and prosecuted to final judgment in the supreme court of this state, and has, without process, or any of the forms recognized by law, assumed the power to reverse that judgment in a matter involving the personal liberty of the citizen, asserted by and adjusted to him by the regular course of judicial proceedings upon the great writ of liberty secured to the people of each state by the constitution of the United States :
And whereas, such assumption of power and authority by the supreme court of the United States, to become the final arbiter of the liberty of the citizen, and to override and nullify the judgments of the state courts, declaration thereof, is in direct conflict with that provision of the constitution of the United States which secures to • the people the benefits of writ of habeas corpus : Therefore, 248 JOINT RESOLUTIONS—NUMBER 5.
Resolved, the Senate concurring, That we regard the action of the supreme court of the United States, in assuming jurisdiction in the case before mentioned, as an arbitrary act of power, unauthorized by the constitution, and virtually superseding the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus, and prostrating the rights and liberties of the people at the foot of unlimited power.
Resolved, That this assumption of jurisdiction by the federal judiciary, in the said case, and without process, is an act of undelegated power, and therefore without authority, void, and of no force. Resolved, That the government formed by the constitution of the United States was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself ; but that, as in all other cases of compact among parties having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.
Resolved, That the principle and construction contended for by the party which now rules in the councils of the nation, that the general government is the exclusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it, stop nothing short of despotism, since the discretion of those who administer the government, and not the constitution, would be the measure of their powers ; that the several states which formed that instrument, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction ; and that a positive defiance of those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts done or attempted to be done under color of that instrument, is the rightful remedy. Approved March 19, 1859.
There you have it. It can be done. It has been done. One might say there is a legal and historical precedent.
What more compelling reason could there be than there is a foreign invasion?
The campaign of asymmetrical warfare being waged against us requires asymmetrical resistance. This invasion is designed to overwhelm the system, segment the country and create division and chaos, as well as a disidentification with the idea of being American. This makes it easier to submit the population to global tyranny.
The deep state is already having operatives pose as white supremacists. It is a distinct possibility that deep state operatives may start attacking soft targets, shopping malls, office building, and so on, under the guise of Hezbollah or Hamas attacks. This would create the context where the government and media could manipulate the same people that promoted Covid tyranny, lockdowns, masks, forced bioweapon injections, and the like, to call for an overarching police state. This could be easily done by manipulating people based on their fear, but also their hatred, and their core religious beliefs.
The dog and pony show needs to end now. The constant nonsense of losing and selling the idea that we tried and there is nothing we can do, is designed to imprint learned helplessness on the population and condition it to accept the inevitable, which is the disintegration of the United States and World Government.
It appears that the State of Texas is interpreting the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in to be very specific and limited in focus.
Air Force Maj. Gen. Thomas Suelzer was appointed by Abbott to oversee the Texas National Guard and Texas State Guard as the agency's adjutant general. He told staff that he believes the ruling only permits Border Patrol to cut through obstacles to retrieve stranded migrants, the source said. Suelzer added that his troops will repair any obstacles destroyed by federal agents, and that his troops won't allow the feds to set up migrant processing centers in areas they've blocked.
This interpretation is a good sign. Governor Abbot and the Texas legislature should make it official and act immediately and Nullify the U.S. Supreme Court's decision."