cross-posted from the New Hampshire Tenth Amendment Center

Written testimony in support of HB 324

Article 7 of the New Hampshire bill of rights says the Federal government only has powers “expressly delegated”; and as article 7 pre-dates the Constitution for the United States it was clearly understood at the time of the signing of the compact between the States.

Whereas the power delegated to the United States with concern to commerce reads “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes” and a 1942 Supreme Court ruling changed the meaning of commerce to include “anything that affects commerce”.

The plain text of the commerce clause in the Constitution for the United States does not read “To regulate anything that affects commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”

The 1942 change to the commerce clause was not authorized under article V of the Constitution for the United States; therefore any Federal law or regulation of commerce that originates in New Hampshire and never leaves the State of New Hampshire is not in pursuance of enumerated powers explicitly granted to the Federal government and therefore not the supreme law of the land.

Under the powers retained by the States in the 10th amendment to the constitution for the United States HB 324 is the rightful remedy to unconstitutional laws and regulations created by the Federal government; and whereas the Federal government has demonstrated an unwillingness to cease and desist in this extra-constitutional adventure for 69 years penalties for this behavior must be set.

I urge you to vote yes on HB 324 and take this needed step to restoring constitutional order to our great republic.

*******

CLICK HERE to view the Tenth Amendment Center’s Model Legislation – The Intrastate Commerce Act

CLICK HERE – to view the Tenth Amendment Center’s Intrastate Commerce Act Tracking Page