Tags

, , ,

Through over two hundred years of American history:

MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

[….]

….It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. [5 U.S. 137, 178]   So if a law be in opposition to the constitution: if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution, disregarding the law: the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty….

[….]

A bill, pre-filed today by Representative Tim Remole (r):

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE BILL NO. 255 [pdf]

98TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE REMOLE.

0867H.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 1, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to regulations resulting

from presidential executive orders.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 1, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 1.345, to read as follows:

1.345. 1. Any federal regulation or rule promulgated as a result of an executive order of the President of the United States repugnant of the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of Missouri shall be declared invalid in the state of Missouri. Such regulations and rules shall be considered null and void and of no effect.

2. It shall be the duty of the general assembly to adopt and enact any and all measures as may be necessary to prevent the enforcement of regulations and rules issued by a presidential executive order.

[emphasis in original]

The Missouri General Assembly isn’t the final arbiter on the question of what’s constitutional or not.

“….repugnant of….the Constitution of Missouri shall be declared invalid in the state of Missouri….”

In the United States Constitution:

Article VI

All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

[emphasis added]

It’s also called “the supremacy clause”.

Sigh. This was settled one hundred fifty years ago.

Previously:

You and what army? (December 3, 2014)

HB 2256: It’s April, fools… (April 1, 2014)

SB 119: a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds (January 9, 2013)