States can not override federal law. The only way they could, is via an article 5 convention. This is basic civics.
Flabbergasted..once again pot is legal in Illinois and in the past one could enter a foreign country with just a states driver's license
Not at that time. We had agreements with Mexico and Canada. Now, you need either a passport, or passport card to enter Canada or Mexico.
I have no idea what this is in reference to. You asked a question, specifically asking “ wouldn’t you need a federal passport” which I replied with “not at that time”.
I’m pointing out the state can not prevent federal law enforcement from enforcing federal law. quite often. There is nothing any of those states can do to stop ICE from detaining/arresting someone.
Thank you for clarification.. So do you think we are just one land mass now with one common values and everyone agrees with guys in dresses in little girls bathrooms?
Of course not. There are different values in different parts of a single city, so obviously there are different values all across the country. The simple fact remains......the US is a single sovereign nation made up of states.
If 50 sovereign states has it's own government and own military, it's 50 states United for a common cause, not a country like france or Germany. Jesus christ every foreigner knows the difference between Texas and California . We are famous for our distinct states.
refuted this already. They don't have their own military. Their local governments are subordinate to the federal government. Just like they know the difference between Los Angelas and San Francisco. Not relevant to the discussion. . all under a single sovereign nation.
There is plenty you DO NOT WANT THE STATES TO DO. Because if such is allowed then there will be Healthcare Coverage mismatch according to state-directed ways-and-means, principles and definitions. That will make healthcare coverage a hodgepodge across the US. Is that what you expect from your present Social Security? Of course not - so like any other government agency, US healthcare should be run by a National Healthcare Service. In that manner, no one state has an advantage over another - and we've seen far enough of that barrel-of-contention as regards "services". The same should be done for Post-secondary Education in a state-run system also subsidized by national income-taxation. Look, it is only by making these propositions (both healthcare and postsecondary education) the responsibility of the national-budget can we ever get to see a uniform availability of either such services across the country. If we let the states do it, then there will a lack of symmetry across the country - meaning some people will get good Healthcare and Post-secondary educations and others will not. You wanna call that Socialism - be my guest*. Factually if it enables the country to have an EFFECTIVE National Healthcare-System that increases-lifespan (which just last year decreased by one year in the US) then who in their right-mind could be against it** ... ? *But, in that case, apply the word also to the DoD's budget! **Oh, yes, but some will because it is against their First-Principles upon which the country was supposedly founded - 200 years ago by people who had not the foggiest idea about what a government should do for its people - aside from defend their lives and property. In two-centuries mankind has caught upon some very nice notions about government-related services that betters the lives of its people. Uncle Sam is still in catch-up mode.
I don't know what ANFTA means? I have never made any such claim. This is a strawman. How many times do you guys need called on that before you simply address what I say, instead of what you make up and pretend I said?
irrelevant. it doesn't say S&W M&P shield either. Yet it's protected. And we remain a single sovereign nation.