Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.


Virginia’s Anti-NDAA Bill Seeks to Turn Tables on Feds

Written by:

Published on: January 24, 2015

New legislation that has been introduced to the Virginia assembly would seek to advance a nullification of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act‘s section that claims the federal government can illegally and unconstitutionally kidnap American citizens on US soil and hold them indefinitely without a trial.

Understand that the NDAA was signed into law on New Year’s Eve 2011 by Barack Hussein Obama and, for the most part, the mainstream media has yet to actually report on it.

Will Donald Trump win the 2024 election?

However, that doesn’t mean that Americans are unaware of what the federal government is attempting to do. As a result several states, as well as local municipalities, have sought to put forth resolutions to nullify the unconstitutional legislation.

Virginia was the first state to pass legislation to address the NDAA’s unconstitutional indefinite detention provision.

Delegate Benjamin L. Cline (R – House District 24) sponsored HB2144, which will go beyond the previous legislation. While the first law was passed that simply disallowed any state employees or law enforcement to be involved and provide aid to the federal government in enforcing the criminal legislation, this second round of legislation would require two things from federal agents who want to detain Virginia citizens.

According to the bill the first requirement would be, “”the U.S. Secretary of Defense shall provide notification within 24 hours of the detention to both the Secretary of Public Safety and the chief law-enforcement officer of the locality in which the citizen is detained…”

The second requirement would be, “the U.S. Secretary of Defense or his designee shall seek authorization from the chief law-enforcement officer of the locality in which the citizen is detained prior to removal of the citizen from the locality.”

Theoretically this would provide two layers of protection, something that already exists, to guard the citizens of Virginia against the tyranny that is being imposed upon the American people.

Kelli Sladick at the Tenth Amendment Center comments:

A series of events is triggered upon detainment of any person in the state of Virginia by the DoD. The state of Virginia will gather and publish Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs). These are essentially partnerships with state funds attached to them. These agreements are not necessarily legally binding, but usually offer some privacy between state, private enterprises (contractors), and federal partnerships. Much of this kind of information usually remains hidden from the general public.

“The Secretary of Finance shall obtain from each cabinet secretary and submit to the House Appropriations and Senate Finance Committees, to be published in some manner on an annual basis, a list and description of all memoranda of understanding (MOUs) entered into between the Commonwealth and agencies of the federal government.”

This provision in and of itself provides a great service to the people of Virginia, allowing them to see exactly what types of agreements exist between the state and various federal agencies.

The legislation then adds a final provision that would go into effect if the federal government detains somebody under Section 1021 and 1022 of NDAA 2012 and fails to provide the requirements in sections one and two.

“…funds appropriated for implementation or continuation of such MOUs shall be contingent upon authorization by an act of the General Assembly in a subsequent year. The Governor may also order termination of any MOU at any time for noncompliance with this section.

According to the Tenth Amendment Center’s national communications director Mike Maharrey, Virginia’s approach to the NDAA is “brilliant.”

“First, it shines some sunlight on what’s going on between the state and federal government,” said Maharrey. “That provision alone is a win for Virginians. Then it creates significant consequences for the feds if they kidnap somebody on Virginia soil. It would allow the state to deny important resources to the federal government if its agents snatch up somebody in the night and hold them without due process. I love seeing this kind of boldness and creativity from state legislators.”

I do too! Although I confess that I prefer more of the approach of Albany, New York, whose anti-NDAA legislation not only nullified the NDAA’s indefinite detention provisions by not supporting it with state resources, but also actively called upon law enforcement to stand between citizens and federal officials and the U.S. military

The Constitution, of which every representative that voted for this piece of legislation to an oath to uphold, states:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

The New American’s Joe Wolverton points out and explains that Virginia is using “the most effective weapon in the war against federal tyranny… Nullification occurs when a state, county, city, or other local entity holds as null, void, and of no legal effect any act of the federal government that exceeds the boundaries of its constitutional powers.”

Nullification recognizes that states retain the prerogative to invalidate any federal measure that exceeds the few and defined powers allowed the federal government as enumerated in the U.S. Constitution,” Wolverton writes. “States (and their legal subdivisions) retain the right to act as arbiters of the constitutionality of federal acts because they formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the central government to enact laws that are applicable to the states and the citizens thereof.”

Like it or not, the NDAA’s indefinite detention provision is unconstitutional. Sadly, many representatives don’t even flinch when they speak about completely unconstitutional legislation. Just take a look at how South Carolina’s US Senator Lindsey Graham responded when confronted on the issue and then take a moment to think how that might coincide with the federal government’s targeting of American patriots.

Become an insider!

Sign up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media.

Don't forget to like on Facebook and Twitter.
The opinions expressed in each article are the opinions of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of

Trending on The Sons of Liberty Media