Does the Creature Dictate to the Creator?

John Marshall quote: The people made the Constitution, and ...
Is this correct?

Background of Clause

Except for the single limitation that the consent of Congress must be obtained, the original inherent sovereign rights of the states to make compacts with each other was not surrendered under the Constitution.2270 “The Compact,” as the Supreme Court has put it, “adapts to our Union of sovereign States the age-old treaty-making power of independent sovereign nations.”2271 In American history, the compact technique can be traced back to the numerous controversies that arose over the ill-defined boundaries of the original colonies. These disputes were usually resolved by negotiation, with the resulting agreement subject to approval by the Crown.2272 When the political ties with Britain were broken, the Articles of Confederation provided for appeal to Congress in all disputes between two or more states over boundaries or “any cause whatever”2273 and required the approval of Congress for any “treaty confederation or alliance” to which a state should be a party.2274

The Framers of the Constitution went further. By the first clause of this section they laid down an unqualified prohibition against “any treaty, alliance or confederation,” and by the third clause they required the consent of Congress for “any agreement or compact.” The significance of this distinction was pointed out by Chief Justice Taney in Holmes v. Jennison:2275 “[A]s these words [‘agreement’ and ‘compact’] could not have been idly or superfluously used by the framers of the constitution, they cannot be construed to mean the same thing with the word treaty. They evidently mean something more, and were designed to make the prohibition more comprehensive. . . . The word ‘agreement,’ does not necessarily import any direct and express stipulation; nor is it necessary that it should be in writing. If there is a verbal understanding, to which both parties have assented, and upon which both are acting, it is an ‘agreement.’ And the use of all of these terms, ‘treaty,’ ‘agreement,’ ‘compact,’ show that it was the intention of the framers of the constitution to use the broadest and most comprehensive terms; and that they anxiously desired to cut off all connection or communication between a state and a foreign power; and we shall fail to execute that evident intention, unless we give to the word ‘agreement’ its most extended signification; and so apply it as to prohibit every agreement, written or verbal, formal or informal[,] positive or implied, by the mutual understanding of the parties.”2276 But, in Virginia v. Tennessee,2277 decided more than a half century later, the Court shifted position, holding that the unqualified prohibition of compacts and agreements between states without the consent of Congress did not apply to agreements concerning such minor matters as adjustments of boundaries, which have no tendency to increase the political powers of the contracting states or to encroach upon the just supremacy of the United States. Adhering to this later understanding of the clause, the Court found no enhancement of state power in relation to the Federal Government through entry into the Multistate Tax Compact, and thus sustained the agreement among participating states without congressional consent.2278

Subject Matter of Interstate Compacts

For many years after the Constitution was adopted, boundary disputes continued to predominate as the subject matter of agreements among the states. Since the turn of the twentieth century, however, the interstate compact has been used to an increasing extent as an instrument for state cooperation in carrying out affirmative programs for solving common problems.2279 The execution of vast public undertakings, such as the development of the Port of New York by the Port Authority created by compact between New York and New Jersey, flood control, the prevention of pollution, and the conservation and allocation of water supplied by interstate streams, are among the objectives accomplished by this means. Another important use of this device was recognized by Congress in the act of June 6, 1934,2280 whereby it consented in advance to agreements for the control of crime. The first response to this stimulus was the Crime Compact of 1934, providing for the supervision of parolees and probationers, to which most of the states have given adherence.2281 Subsequently, Congress has authorized, on varying conditions, compacts touching the production of tobacco, the conservation of natural gas, the regulation of fishing in inland waters, the furtherance of flood and pollution control, and other matters. Moreover, many states have set up permanent commissions for interstate cooperation, which have led to the formation of a Council of State Governments, the creation of special commissions for the study of the crime problem, the problem of highway safety, the trailer problem, problems created by social security legislation, and the framing of uniform state legislation for dealing with some of these.2282

More…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From Publius Huldah:

WHERE did the federal government come from? It was CREATED by the Constitution.

WHO ratified the Constitution? WE THE PEOPLE, acting through special ratifying conventions called in each of the States.  So it was The People of each State who ratified the federal Constitution for their State.

So the federal government is merely the “creature” of the Constitution and is completely subject to its terms.

Those are not my words. Those are the words of Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper No. 33 (5th para), and Thomas Jefferson in his draft of The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, under the 8th Resolution.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE to have a correct understanding of the relation between the federal government and The People unless you understand that the federal government is merely the “creature” of the Constitution. It is not a party to it. The STATES are the parties to the constitutional compact (contract).

THIS is why James Madison said, in his Report of 1799 to the Virginia Legislature on the Virginia Resolutions of 1798, under his discussion of the 3rd Resolution, that THE STATES, as the creators of the federal government, are the final authority on whether their creature has violated the compact THE STATES MADE WITH EACH OTHER. The constitutional compact is between the Sovereign States. The federal government is merely the “creature” of that compact.

That is why the States have the natural right to NULLIFY unconstitutional acts of their “creature”, the federal government.

But our “creature”, the federal government, has taken the bizarre position that the Constitution means whatever THEY say it means.

Oh, do they need smacking down! Does the creature dictate to its creator?

The nullification deniers say, “YES!”

Manly men say, “NO!”

Source

      
Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial. Bookmark the permalink.
5 1 vote
Article Rating
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hans
Hans
2 months ago

Yes, the “creature” was created by the several States through the dubious convention of 1787, but the creature was a Frankenstein’s Monster.

While I enjoy debates of original intent and issues of construction, they are largely irrelevant as none of the originalism is respected by current government or its’ court system.

We have suffered through two reconstructions designed to centralize power in the hands of Frankenstein’s Monster; one well known and labeled as such at the end of the War of Northern Aggression, and another “quiet” reconstruction occurred during the years 1947 through 1968.

Both reconstructions were engineered to alter our country from a land of liberty to a nation of empire. Like in Star Wars, the empire must be destroyed. It cannot be changed from within as the mechanisms for self-correction have been destroyed.

The best summary of the transition I’ve read recently was on Mises.org “The Consolidation of State Power”. An excerpt from the introduction:

“Abraham Lincoln’s ascendancy to the presidency signified a final victory of sorts for the eighteenth- and early-nineteenth-century Hamiltonians’ quest to construct a highly centralized state that would maintain power via an alliance with government-subsidized businesses.1 This was always the Whig Party’s agenda, and Lincoln was a Whig for much longer than he was a Republican. The War for Southern Independence was not a war “to free the slaves,” as the high school civics class version of history has been presented by government-run schools for some 135 years. Rather, it was a war between Southerners who wanted to maintain the Founders’ system of limited, decentralized government and Northern Yankees who wanted to replace the Old Republic with a highly centralized, mercantilist state.

“An auxiliary myth has it that federal policy in the conquered South was aimed at “binding the nation’s wounds” and establishing a “just and lasting peace,” as Lincoln said. Yes, many Americans sought these noble goals, but they are to be distinguished from the state, whose objectives were quite different.

“In this article, I will argue that the main purpose (and effect) of the 1865–1877 “Reconstruction” policies was to centralize and consolidate state power and to establish Republican Party political hegemony. It was not to “heal the nation’s wounds” or economically revitalize the South. Indeed, Reconstruction created new wounds and economically destroyed the South. Its purpose was to continue the economic plundering of the Southern states for as long as possible, and to establish a national Republican Party political monopoly.

“The federal government did not totally succeed in this endeavor, thanks to continued Southern political resistance and a still-vibrant support among the American people for constitutional government. Nevertheless, by 1890, the federal government was vastly larger than the founders ever envisioned, and its purpose had changed from the protection of individual liberty to the quest for empire.”

https://mises.org/library/consolidation-state-power-reconstruction-1865-1890

robert
robert
2 months ago

We can live together in peace if we simply surrender our children to be sodomized,raped,and enslaved . That’s all they want . Ha!Ha!Ha! They shoulda’ left the kids alone . They could have gotten much further before we snapped . Now Mercy will flee from them . Would seccession be better that what we must do if forced by a perverse government controlled mob ? Yes ! But the Godless left must be forcefully stopped .

Laura McDonough
Laura McDonough
2 months ago
Reply to  robert

This is allowed for the kids in primary school esp. live shows w/ drag queens (some molest kids) in public libraries across the land. Parents that are idiots/immoral allow this w/ the kids in lower grades. https://massresistance.org/ folks, don’t expect gov. controlled 501c3 churches and their national assoc/seminaries to speak out. They are apostate money pits and social clubs. Few churches are solid in 2021 many home church w/ family or friends reading puritan sermons and Bible studies.

WorkingDawg
WorkingDawg
2 months ago

Thanks for posting this. It is certainly true that the States are sovereign and remain so. It is also true, that each man and women is sovereign as well. Most Americans do not understand how the government is actually designed to work. Obviously, you can’t operate a complex and powerful machine safety and efficiently if you do not understand how it is intended and designed to work.
I believe that it is critical for all Americans to learn all 4 of the Organic Laws of the United States of America. They are still all in force.
https://uscode.house.gov/browse/frontmatter/organiclaws&edition=prelim
The Constitution of 1787, as amended, is only part of the complete constitution devised by the Founders for their posterity. Properly understood, it modified some parts of the Articles of Confederation (AOC). Once you understand that the Declaration of Independence, the AOC and the Northwest Ordinance are the first 3 parts of the full constitution you can begin to grasp how it was designed and how it is intended to operate. You will not learn this in a government school or any church. Our government, at all levels has been perverted into something that it was never supposed to be. That happened long before any of us were born because so few Americans actually understood their sovereign powers and how to apply them in the context of the American government. We are now beginning to reap the full price of ignorance.
We are all very late to this challenge but it is never too late to educate yourself and your family and stand up as sovereign men and women.
And no, you don’t “hold court” at the side of the road arguing with some poor LEO that you are a “sovereign citizen” or “free inhabitant”.
Understanding “ownership” and who owns what precisely is however very important. One important clue is that law makers, judges and other public servants frequently state: “The Constitution is the Supreme law of the land”. They never precisely state the nature of the land they are referring to.

Dan
Dan
2 months ago

The people in power, on politics, simply DO NOT CARE what the Constitution says, what ‘we the people’ say or want or anything else.
ALL they care about is power and privilege. NOTHING ELSE MATTERS to them. And as long as nobody and nothing interferes with their quest for power and privilege, as long as they suffer no negative consequences, no pain for their actions that fact isn’t going to change.

Laura McDonough
Laura McDonough
2 months ago
Reply to  Dan

Congress people are bribed by lobby groups and big corp. voting is an utter sham as this country has gone beyond corruption into tyranny.

trackback

[…] Does the Creature Dictate to the Creator? […]

Gryphon
Gryphon
2 months ago

This Article is ‘accurate’ yet it Ignores the Fact that the Original Constitution was Dissolved by the Secession of a number of States. The ‘Federalists’ re-constituted a Rump ‘nation, and went to War against the States that had ‘Seceded’ from the Constitution. By a Military Victory, the ‘Federalists’ took Absolute Control of all the States, and instituted the “Corporation” known as the UNITED STATES CORPORATION (the all caps is Important) in 1871, by the ‘Organic Act’ that created the current, corporate “constitution” in the “District of Columbia”, a nation-state NOT a part of the (formerly sovereign) “States of America” .
Once you do some Research on this Subject (Look up what Senator James Trafficant had to say, if jootoob hasn’t Erased it) You will see that long before the fraud (s)Election, the States have been RULED by something that has taken the trappings of the Nation as it was Founded, but answers Not to ‘We the People’ but to the ‘god money’ of certain Creatures.
The recent Denial of God by a satanist, in the Capitol, should be All you need to Know where this is headed. And sorry, all you fools who go to a 501(c)3 “Church”, God isn’t coming to ‘save you’.

Hans
Hans
2 months ago
Reply to  Gryphon

Hello Gryphon --

For readers unfamiliar with Senator Trafficant and the bankruptcy of the Corporation, here is a link to the text of his speech:

http://rvbeypublications.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/webjamestraficant.pdf

Gryphon
Gryphon
2 months ago
Reply to  Hans

Thanks. I believe that was a large part of why He was ‘framed’ for ‘corruption’. The entire existence of the False, ‘corporate’ government is a Subject that were it widely Known, would cause the Collapse of the Scam rather quickly.