By John Michener

Every branch of the federal government is involved in unconstitutional activity. Congress passes unauthorized bills; the President gives unlawful executive orders; the supreme Court issues faulty opinions; and the fourth branch of government, the bureaucracy, just piles on to the whole mess. Almost everything the federal government does is unconstitutional. The adjective “unconstitutional” is often used in political commentary, and rightly so; but when we use a word too often, it begins to lose its meaning. So let us take a few extra sentences to deepen our understanding of “unconstitutional.”

First, an act of government that is unconstitutional is immoral because it breaks an agreement. Our constitution is an agreement, or contract, among the states. When our agent, the federal government, violates the agreement, it is cheating; it is lying; it is bearing false witness; it is stealing by taking power, control, and ownership to which it has no right. Immoral liars and cheaters should be removed from office. They are not to be trusted with positions of power and leadership.

Second, an act of government that is unconstitutional is unlawful. It breaks the law as surely as robbing a bank. It is a breach of contract. It is as illegal as rape or murder. We all agreed on the rules, but they ignore the rules. Justice demands that lawbreakers be punished for their crimes and criminals be removed from office.

I reiterate these facts to show just how worthless it would be to attempt to stop lying, cheating, criminals (federal politicians) by calling for an Article V Convention of States. This strategy would just give them more rules to break.

The Fifth Amendment says, “No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Therefore, in sanctioning murder by abortion, the supreme Court violated the Constitution as it is written. Should we call for a Convention of states to add the Twenty-Eighth Amendment? It might read, “Remember the Fifth Amendment? We didn’t mean it the first time, but now we really, really, mean it, and you had better follow it, or else we’ll add another amendment to the Constitution.”

According to the Constitution, the purpose of a Convention of States is to change the Constitution, not to enforce it. Federalism (separation of powers between the states and their general government in Washington, D.C.) was the founders’ design for enforcement. Calling a Convention of states to enforce the Constitution is like trying to use a hammer as a screwdriver.

Furthermore, calling for a Convention of States is a meaningless ploy that enables politicians to tell you they are fighting federal tyranny. Many well-meaning public servants are being sucked into this vortex because they want to feel like they are doing something. Unfortunately, calling for a Convention is much easier than personally confronting federal lawlessness. Let us explore a more effective way to check our federal criminals.

First, we need a robust battle of jurisdictions. Fifty to sixty years ago, when agencies of the federal government were beginning to seriously flex their muscle in the states, it was common for local sheriffs to defend their turf. Cop shows and detective mysteries of the era depicted local law enforcement personnel who jealously guarded their jurisdictions against federal agents attempting to lord it over them. Typically, the local sheriff and his wisecracking investigators were able to undermine and best the feds. The townspeople trusted the local elected officials with whom they had relationships, and they helped those officials to serve justice.

In stark contrast, entertainment programs these days glorify federal agents, from the ATF to Homeland Security. Local law enforcement agents are typically portrayed as country bumpkins who need to get out of the way of the real pros, who will use their superior intelligence and high-tech gizmos (which, of course, they would never use illegally on citizens) to save us from sinister terrorists.

Remember the premise: these federal agencies are unconstitutional, i.e., immoral and unlawful. Our state officials should treat those who break the law as criminals. As agents of a sovereign state, Oklahoma officials possess the legal authority, and they have the moral duty, to protect the citizens in their jurisdictions from criminals and their actions. That means removing these criminals from Oklahoma society and erecting barriers between them and us. In other words, rather than write more rules for the criminals to break, Oklahoma officials should actually check unlawful federal acts by launching real, effective, counter-actions.

Our local law enforcement agents, led by our governor and backed by our legislature, should deny federal agents access and authority in our jurisdiction. Whether they are agents of the EPA, Department of Education, Bureau of Land Management, or Homeland Security, Oklahoma officials must deny them access to our citizens, just as we would deny any criminal access to our citizens. Our officials must deny them the ability to exercise their improper, usurped authority, in the same way an individual rebuffs a thief from his home.

Second, we need the kind of Oklahoma officials who will fight this battle of jurisdictions. For decades, governors like Mary Fallin and pro-tems like Sen. Mike Schulz have colluded with the federal tyrant in exchange for dollars. They have hidden behind the lie that we must obey unconstitutional federal mandates and court opinions. Under their non-leadership, we have become the Federal District of Oklahoma, taking whatever lawless edicts Washington inserts into our state. Thomas Jefferson predicted this would happen in his Kentucky Resolutions of 1798: “If those who administer the [federal government] be permitted to transgress the limits fixed by the [Constitution], by a total disregard to the special delegations of power therein contained, annihilation of the state governments, and the erection upon their ruins, of a general consolidation government, will be the inevitable consequence.”

We need a governor to provide leadership and direction. A governor can explain state sovereignty and unconstitutional acts to the people. A governor can influence and encourage sheriffs to train their deputies in these principles. A governor can marshal state assets to defend citizens against federal aggression. In the instance of murder by abortion, for example, the governor and attorney general should direct law enforcement personnel to physically close and blockade the death camps called “clinics.” The governor can promise to protect and pardon those who help in that process.

Enforcing state sovereignty has worked in the past, and it is working now. Many states are defying unconstitutional federal drug laws to allow their citizens to use marijuana. If states could exercise their sovereignty to set slaves free in the nineteenth century and allow people to smoke pot in the twenty-first century, surely we can find righteous leaders brave enough to use this proven strategy to save innocent children from being butchered by abortion.

Some of the ingredients needed to enforce state sovereignty are already in the mix. Grassroots activists understand state sovereignty, as evidenced by the Republican Party platform, which recognizes Oklahoma as a sovereign state. Many legislators understand state sovereignty, as evidenced by the Tenth Amendment Resolution, passed by the Oklahoma House in 2009, and as evidenced by the current House Resolution 1004, the Resolution to Ban Abortion, which clarifies that abortion is against the law, states that the Supreme Court was wrong (again!), and calls on Oklahoma executives to enforce the law. This Resolution is the recipe for enforcing state sovereignty. It is coauthored by twenty-one representatives and has popular support in the Oklahoma House. Now Oklahoma needs strong leaders who will follow through in the key offices of Governor, Attorney General, and Pro-Tem.

In summary, every branch of the federal government acts immorally and unlawfully by violating the Constitution of the United States, and we must find and support those officials brave enough to bring back the battle of jurisdictions. With executives across the state rising up to defend citizens against federal aggression, supported by the people and the legislature, we could stop the shedding of innocent blood by abortion and experience a renaissance of liberty.