Mark Pulliam Says Nullification Movement ‘Not Constitutional,’ Argues Best Way to Challenge Federal Law Is Through the Courts

Mark Pulliam

Mark Pulliam, a retired attorney and Misrule of Law blogger, said a series of nullification bills introduced in the Tennessee General Assembly are not constitutional despite seemingly being an “easy fix” to federal overreach.

“A lot of people these days come up with these theories and solutions of problems that sound good, that seem like it’s an easy fix, but they’re just not, at the end of the day, serious, and in some cases not workable, and in some cases not constitutional, and this whole nullification movement…is an example of one of those, I think, shamiracle solutions,” Pulliam (pictured above) explained on Monday’s episode of The Michael Patrick Leahy Show.

One bill in the Tennessee Senate, SB 2775, would establish “processes by which the general assembly may nullify an unconstitutional federal statute, regulation, agency order, or executive order.”

The bill called the Restoring State Sovereignty Through Nullification Act, was introduced last year; however, it failed to make it out of the State and Local Government Committee.

On Monday, the bill was deferred to Summer Study.

Last year’s version of the bill was deemed “constitutionally infirm” by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, who added the following in his opinion of the bill:

The separation-of-powers doctrine set forth in article II, sections 1 and 2 of the Tennessee Constitution prevents the General Assembly and the governor from nullifying “unconstitutional federal action.” And the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution prohibits state legislation aimed at increasing the limited authority of state courts to nullify unconstitutional federal action.

“We have a constitution that has a supremacy clause that says federal law is supreme over state law, and that’s been the law, it’s been in the constitution since it was ratified,” Pulliam explained, noting how the best way to solve conflict in regards to federal law is through the courts.

Yes, Every Kid

“The way to solve conflicts between states and federal laws that states disagree with is you get your attorney general, and we have a very capable attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, to go to court and challenge these things,” Pulliam said.

“We have to have a system where if the federal government makes a rule, it’s the rule. It’s binding on the states unless and until a state goes to court and gets somebody to determine that it’s not a valid action. Sometimes these things take time,” Pulliam added.

Pulliam went on to clarify that while he, personally, thinks that the “federal government has become the deep state,” it is a serious problem that requires a “serious solution.”

“I’m not defending the leviathan that the federal government has become the deep state. All of these things are serious problems, but serious problems require serious solutions. [Nullification] is not a serious solution,” Pulliam said.

– – –

Kaitlin Housler is a reporter at The Tennessee Star and The Star News Network. Follow Kaitlin on X / Twitter.
Photo “Mark Pulliam” by Mark Pulliam. 

 

 

 

 

Related posts

3 Thoughts to “Mark Pulliam Says Nullification Movement ‘Not Constitutional,’ Argues Best Way to Challenge Federal Law Is Through the Courts”

  1. Karen Bracken

    Mr. Pulliam proves himself to be a constitutional illiterate as are most lawyers including AG Skrmetti that believe case law trumps the original intent of the constitution. Perhaps Mr. Pulliam and AG Skrmetti need to take a class in reading comprehension. Article VI Clause 2 of the Constitution CLEARLY states that federal law is Supreme ONLY when it is IN PURSUANCE THEROF (the Constitution) The federal government has 18 enumerated powers and they are listed in Art. 1 Sec. 8. But Art. 1 section 9 and 10 lists what the federal government and the states cannot do. Nullification is not on our list. The Federalist Papers mention numerous times that the final arbiter of the Constitution are the creators of the federal government (the states and the people of the states) not the created. Our founders intent, which is documented, was that very limited power was delegated to the federal government while indefinite power belongs to the states and the people of each state. Our founders firmly supported the rightful remedy when the federal government and that includes the Supreme Court stepped outside it constitutional lane was Nullification. And nullification has been used many times in many states including Tennessee. Funny how the majority of our TN Assembly voted to pass SJR9005 in 2021 in support of Nullification but now feel a process in which to invoke Nullification is unconstitutional. Perhaps they truly just do not want to be held accountable to do their job? Our founders made it VERY clear that it was the DUTY of the state legislature to make sure the federal government did not treat outside of it 18 enumerated powers and our state legislature has failed miserably. But the people are waking up and we WILL take back our rightful authority inspire of the constitutionally illiterate members of our Assembly and the AG and his staff. If they are truly interested in improving their situation I am sure Mr. Cobble would be glad to have a discussion on the issue.

  2. Dave Vance

    Typical response from a judicial supremacist. His response makes “We the People”, Art 1, Section 8 and 10 meaningless along with the bill of Rights especially the 9th and 10th Amendment. It means all of our GOD given rights require supreme Court approval. That mentality has a lot to do with the mess our country is in and if anything is a sham it’s the idea that all federal laws Trump the Constitution. We have the Bill of Rights because the states ratifying states feared that the new constitution would give the federal government too much power and one of the clauses in particular that concerned them was the Supremacy Clause. The 9th and 10th Amendment specifically addressed those fears. While the subversiinif our constitution started early on that doesn’t make it legitimate. And for all the years earlier generations failed to demand compliance we are now living with the effects of a court that arbitrarily expands it’s power and that of the federal government. Continuing to live under this lie means we have no hope of ever putting the federal government back in it’s place. Remember the states created the federal government not the other way around.

  3. Steve Allen

    Our current judicial system in the lower courts is a joke. Look what is happening to President Trump. The States must have a stronger platform to disconnect from the liberal marxist controlled federal government.

Comments