Michael Boldin


This interview was conducted by Antiwar Radio producer Angela Keaton.

Michael Boldin, founder of Tenth Amendment Center, discusses the limitations on federal use of state National Guard members, why the Constitution is a good yardstick to measure the lawlessness of government and how a critical mass of states engaged in nullification can overwhelm the federal government’s ability to enforce bad laws.

MP3 here. (8:39)

Michael Boldin is the founder of Tenth Amendment Center and a member of Campaign for Liberty.

7 thoughts on “Michael Boldin”

  1. There seem to be rather a large number of Americans who either think that the Constitution doesn't contradict the Articles of Confederation or else think that the Confederacy actually won the Civil War. The North won, Lincoln won and that settled the issue of Nullification in favour of the Federal Government.

    1. On reflection I think you will realize that the civil war did not resolve the issue in any but a military way–and at that point in time. Secession, under the constitution was and is legal–read up. Sure, you can, or you may, crush it, but it does not prove you are right, and certainly not for all time. The typical public school text book idea that the civil war settle secession, or nullification, is shallow, especially in these dynamic times when the national government is becoming spent. Secession is akin to revolution the right of which is acknowledged in history and particularly by the Declaration of Independence, which the Constitution was surely not intended to disavow.

    2. Well, that's a typical northerner's response. When there's a matter of contention with the law, the guys with more guns wins the argument, right? The fact that the STATES existed before the Federal government, and GIVES it's power to the Federal government means NOTHING to you… As long as the Feds are doing what YOU like, right?

      Because that's how civilized people settle differences, by beating down the argument? You act like a neo-con.

      Were you aware that there were northern states that used nullification in order to refuse to send escaped slaves back to the slave states, as mandated by the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850? With your line of reasoning, they should have just rolled over, and sent those slaves back to their masters.

      Your argument is incoherent and overly simplistic.

  2. This is really hopeful – in that this guy seems to have come from a Left background, but now he's basing his activism on the Constitution. I think restoring the constitution and the bill of rights could be a program that unites right and left. You might have to amend it to take away corporate personhood, but that might be enough.

  3. I didn't realize Wisconsin was well on it's way. Proud to be from Wisconsin. Though I don't believe it will work.
    I would like to believe that the feds could do little to enforce the use of the guard. As with anything else the fed will bludgeon states with the power of the purse, and cut programs (most likely military) in the state that refuses to cooperate. At a time of low employment as well as under employment I am not surte politicians can make such sacrifices. Getting off the federal teet would probably be in the state's best interest in the long run.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.