MEMORIAL

It needs to be understood that there is a vast difference in a resolution versus a memorial. A resolution is not binding. It does not have the force of law behind it. It does not need to be signed by the head of state.

A memorial, however, does have the force of law, but it must be properly structured to have an authoritative position and a binding effect. A memorial must contain specific directives (orders, instructions, etc.). It must set a time limit for the fulfillment of the directives. In order for a memorial to be an official and binding act it must be signed by:

1. the governor of the state

2. the secretary of state and

3. the state attorney-general.

How it works is this way: The state issues a properly constructed memorial to the federal government ordering a specific division of government to perform stated task(s) or to follow the instructions given within the directive section.

It should make known to the federal government the course which the states will follow if the federal government fails to act upon the order(s) within the memorial.

If the federal government ignores or fails to act, choosing not to cooperate with the directives, the states then may take united action on their own to correct the abrogation of power. At all times, it is important to remember that the real seat of power in this country is - not in Washington D.C. - the real seat of power IS with the people of the states, and with the state houses themselves!

The ability of the states to override the federal government in its errant acts is a part of the check and balance system.

The procedure would be to select one state to be the center of handling things. They must get three-fourths of the states passing legislation which the states must draft in order to repeal, revoke, or rescind any act, treaty, agreement, federal legislation, etc. which is in violation of the powers allocated to the federal system by the Constitution. When they achieve this, “the states have spoken” and their superseding legislation becomes law.

This information regarding the ability of the states to control the misconduct of the federal government comes to us via American Challenge who was informed by a federal judge who had been on the bench for 20 years that such could be done, and many years previously, it had been done.

Second Amendment Committee