By Steve Ahlquist and annotated in red by Will Collette
 |
| Local reps Justin Price (R-Richmond) and Blake "Flip" Filippi (R-Charlestown and other places too numerous to mention) oppose this version of state nullification though they have SUPPORTED state nullification on other matters, like guns or resisting President Obama. They can't stand it that someone is talking about nullification as a resistance technique to Donald Trump. |
“The resolution before you tonight is not one that would be
appropriate to introduce in normal times,” said Representative Aaron Regunberg, “but as many of you know, I, and a whole
lot of people in this country feel very strongly that these are not normal
times.”
Regunberg (Democrat, District 4, Providence) was introducing H5545, a
non-binding resolution “encouraging government officials and citizens to
consider the constitutionality and morality of laws and orders emerging from
the Trump administration before carrying out such laws and orders.”
The
resolution is rooted in the Nuremberg principles,
specifically principle 4, which declares the individual morally responsible for
their behaviors even if they were just following the orders of a superior.
The resolution outlines the ways in which the Donald Trump presidency is “exceedingly dangerous”
said Regunberg,
Fillipi, an attorney, led the charge like it was a cross examination. Fillipi charged that g specific parts of the resolution stated as fact some allegations that have yet to be proven.
For instance, in the third WHEREAS clause (you can read the full resolution below), the resolution states, “Voter suppression measures in North Carolina, Florida, Wisconsin, and other states may have been a determining factor in the electoral college victory of Donald J. Trump.” Fillipi questioned whether or not there was in fact voter suppression in North Carolina, Florida and Wisconsin.
“We have a president who has consistently threatened the independence of the judiciary, who is currently under investigation for possible collusion with Russia regarding election interference, whose use of racism in the last election led to his official endorsement by the KKK, and led to a spike in the number of hate crimes committed in the country. That’s really scary to me.”The Republicans on the committee, Blake Fillipi (Republican, District 36, Charlestown, New Shoreham, South Kingstown, Westerly) and Justin Price (Republican, District 39, Richmond, Exeter, Hopkinton) took issue with the resolution.
Fillipi, an attorney, led the charge like it was a cross examination. Fillipi charged that g specific parts of the resolution stated as fact some allegations that have yet to be proven.
For instance, in the third WHEREAS clause (you can read the full resolution below), the resolution states, “Voter suppression measures in North Carolina, Florida, Wisconsin, and other states may have been a determining factor in the electoral college victory of Donald J. Trump.” Fillipi questioned whether or not there was in fact voter suppression in North Carolina, Florida and Wisconsin.
Regunberg pointed to the onerous voter ID laws in
those states, but Fillipi seemed unconvinced.
Fillipi also questioned the validity of the resolution’s claim
that the “business conflicts of the Trump Organization are a clear violation of
the Emoluments Clause of
the Constitution and create unknown obligations of Donald J. Trump to the
governments of Russia, China, and others.”
Representative Price concurred with Fillipi, saying the
resolution makes “unsubstantiated claims” against the president. “I don’t think
[the resolution is] good,” said Price, “I think it’s dangerous and could be
embarrassing to our state.”
EDITOR'S NOTE: Talk about "unsubstantiated" "embarrassing to our state," take Price's stance against vaccinating children to prevent deadly communicable diseases or the fringe conspiracy theory that "someone" is injecting mind-altering drugs into jet fuel which are then spread over the population as "chem-trails.". Or Price's support of the Three Percenter movement which hopes to mobilize 3% of the population to overthrow the government. Or his bill to allow motorists to run down protesters who block the road. - W. Collette
EDITOR'S NOTE: Talk about "unsubstantiated" "embarrassing to our state," take Price's stance against vaccinating children to prevent deadly communicable diseases or the fringe conspiracy theory that "someone" is injecting mind-altering drugs into jet fuel which are then spread over the population as "chem-trails.". Or Price's support of the Three Percenter movement which hopes to mobilize 3% of the population to overthrow the government. Or his bill to allow motorists to run down protesters who block the road. - W. Collette
Representative Camille Vella Wilkinson (Democrat,
District 21, Warwick), a retired military officer, took issue with the part of
the resolution that, “urges all service members and officers in the military
and national guard to refuse to engage in violent repression of US citizens and
residents engaged in peaceful demonstrations, protests, dissent, and other
exercises of First Amendment rights.”
Encouraging the military to refuse orders potentially puts
individual members of the military into Fort Leavenworth, said
Vella Wilkinson. “He or she would be the subject of a court martial.
“You have to keep in mind, sir, that whether or not you like the
president, the president is the commander-in-chief of the military,” said Vella
Wilkinson, “When a person puts on the uniform, they temporarily have their
civil rights suspended. So they’re not in a position where they can just decide
to go along their political or moral teachings. They have to follow orders.”
EDITOR'S NOTE: The language in the resolution IS, in fact, very similar to that used by the far-right wing militia group, The Oathkeepers. Comprised many of present and ex-military and police, their founding tenet was the belief that uniformed personnel can and should refuse and resist any order or policy they deem to be unconstitutional. Ironically, Rep. Blake Filippi is a high-profile Oathkeeper support, having represented them in court and spoken at their rallies.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The language in the resolution IS, in fact, very similar to that used by the far-right wing militia group, The Oathkeepers. Comprised many of present and ex-military and police, their founding tenet was the belief that uniformed personnel can and should refuse and resist any order or policy they deem to be unconstitutional. Ironically, Rep. Blake Filippi is a high-profile Oathkeeper support, having represented them in court and spoken at their rallies.
Representative David Coughlin (Democrat,
District 60, Pawtucket) concurred with Representative Fillipi that more proof
is needed in the WHEREAS portions of the resolution before he would feel
comfortable supporting the RESOLVED portions.
The resolution was considered rather late in the evening,
towards the end of the House Judiciary Committee meeting. Still, eight people
waited over four hours to speak in favor of the resolution. No one spoke
against the resolution except for Fillipi, Price and Coughlin.
Rachel is a retired nurse and a concerned citizen. Her testimony
was moving: heartfelt and beautiful.
“When President Trump attacks journalists, calling them the
enemy of the people, he sets an example in which the voice of dissent is an
enemy that should be silenced. I am determined to fight for the democratic
principles that I hold dear.”
Bryan Cahall is a poet and composer from Pawtucket, as becomes obvious
when you hear his testimony. When Cahall compared Trump rallies to
circuses, Representative Price interrupted, asking, “Are we on the resolution
or are we name calling?” (7m11s)
“When Trump calls journalists ‘the enemies of the people’ he is
evoking Joseph Stalin,” said Cahall, “When Bannon writes and Trump reads
‘America first’ he is invoking a pro-Nazi organization from over 80 years ago…”
Jane Tucker, of Indivisible RI, sees the resolution as
a way to reassure “our children and all the vulnerable people of our state that
we’re behind them.
“Even if we are able to block these deportation orders and
immigration bans this culture of fear is very real in our state. It’s very
present,” said Tucker, “And it’s very concerning for me, for our children that
are living here.”
“This resolution should not have been had to be written,” said Jonathan Jacobs, “but it did, because we need to remind
ourselves that we, as Rhode Islanders, are obligated to uphold our commitment
to protect the civil rights, the human rights and the hope of our Rhode Island
family.”
Climate activist Tim DeChristopher argued
that the Nuremberg principles were written as a protection for military
member’s “innate moral autonomy.”
DeChristopher referenced the part of the resolution that “urges
all regulatory officials to avoid suppressing necessary information or
providing false information to the American people regarding science, economic
data, demographic data, or any other facts necessary to the functioning of a
fully informed citizenry.”
“Just this past week,” said DeChristopher, “the Office of Energy
and Climate Change within the Department of Energy was
told they’re not allowed to use the words ‘climate change’ any more. They’re
not allowed to use the word ‘sea level rise.’ They’re not allowed to use the
words ‘carbon emission.’ They are being told to withhold and lie to the public,
lie to all of you, about an issue of existential importance… We know what the
agenda is. We know who the scapegoats are. We know who is being targeted.”
Gregory Waksmulski‘s testimony so upset Representative
Price that he interrupted a second time, saying, “I can’t stand this anymore.”
“Okay, then leave,” said House Judiciary Chair Cale Keable (Democrat, District 47, Burrillville,
Glocester). “There’s no obligation to be here. You’ve got ten citizens that
want to talk, they’re talking about a resolution…”
“Sorry,” said Price, as he left the room.
“I love democracy,” said Waksmulski, continuing his testimony,
“I’m learning so much about our representatives.”
Randall Rose was the last speaker. “The important part of the
resolution is that it encourages people to uphold our constitutional values… I
would support this resolution as a useful reminder no matter who was president,
but I think it’s particularly needed now.”
Here’s the full text of the resolution:
ENCOURAGING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND CITIZENS TO CONSIDER THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY AND MORALITY OF LAWS AND ORDERS EMERGING FROM THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION BEFORE CARRYING OUT SUCH LAWS AND ORDERS
WHEREAS, The moral principles, democratic
institutions, and rule of law of the United States of America are only
preserved through the vigilance of the people against threats to liberty,
fairness, integrity, independence, and transparency; and
WHEREAS, President Donald J. Trump lost the
national popular vote by nearly three
million votes; and
million votes; and
WHEREAS, Voter suppression measures in North
Carolina, Florida, Wisconsin, and other states may have been a determining
factor in the electoral college victory of Donald J. Trump; and
WHEREAS, The electoral interference of Russia
may have been a determining factor in the electoral college victory of Donald
J. Trump; and
WHEREAS, The electoral interference of FBI
Director James Comey may have been a
determining factor in the electoral college victory of Donald J. Trump; and
determining factor in the electoral college victory of Donald J. Trump; and
WHEREAS, The business conflicts of the Trump
Organization are a clear violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution
and create unknown obligations of Donald J. Trump to the governments of Russia,
China, and others; and
WHEREAS, President Donald J. Trump refuses to
disclose his financial obligations and liabilities through the release of his
tax returns as has been the norm for modern presidents; and
WHEREAS, The Trump regime continues to use
the Office of the Presidency to illegally promote the private profit of the
Trump brands and intimidate private companies; and
WHEREAS, President Donald J. Trump continues
to disregard the constitutional separation of powers and threatens the
independence of the judiciary branch; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That this House of Representatives
of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations hereby urges all
government officials and citizens who are tasked with enforcing the laws and
edicts of the Trump regime to carefully consider the legitimacy, constitutionality
and morality of those laws and edicts before enforcing them; and be it further
RESOLVED, That this House urges all service
members and officers in the military and national guard to refuse to engage in
violent repression of US citizens and residents engaged in peaceful
demonstrations, protests, dissent, and other exercises of First Amendment
rights; and be it further
RESOLVED, That this House urges border and
immigration officials to refuse to implement unconstitutional discrimination
based on religion or ethnicity; and be it further
RESOLVED, That this House urges all regulatory
officials to avoid suppressing necessary information or providing false
information to the American people regarding science, economic data,
demographic data, or any other facts necessary to the functioning of a fully
informed citizenry; and be it further
RESOLVED, That this House urges national
security and judiciary officials to hold the Trump regime accountable to
previously established legal standards; and be it further
RESOLVED, That this House calls upon all
citizens serving on jury duty to use the temporary powers granted to them to
protect their fellow citizens from draconian repressions based on race,
ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, class, or political
expression. The house moreover recognizes that the moral responsibility of
upholding the fundamental principles, rights, and protections of our nation is
a responsibility shared by all people in our society; and be it further
RESOLVED, That the Secretary of State be and
hereby is authorized and directed to transmit duly certified copies of this
resolution to the President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, and the
Rhode Island Congressional Delegation.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Nullification is a dangerous concept, whether practiced by the right or the left. The South's belief in nullification to protect slavery was the major cause of the civil war. A blanket claim of nullification, as in this resolution, or the Oathkeeper's credo, is in my opinion, a direct attack on our Constitutional system of government. Acts of nullification on specific issues or principles, such as decriminalizing marijuana use or granting sanctuary to undocument immigrants are acts of civil disobedience that come with the risk of consequences. - W. Collette
EDITOR'S NOTE: Nullification is a dangerous concept, whether practiced by the right or the left. The South's belief in nullification to protect slavery was the major cause of the civil war. A blanket claim of nullification, as in this resolution, or the Oathkeeper's credo, is in my opinion, a direct attack on our Constitutional system of government. Acts of nullification on specific issues or principles, such as decriminalizing marijuana use or granting sanctuary to undocument immigrants are acts of civil disobedience that come with the risk of consequences. - W. Collette
Steve Ahlquist is an award-winning journalist,
writer, artist and founding member of the Humanists of Rhode Island, a
non-profit group dedicated to reason, compassion, optimism, courage and action.
The views expressed are his own and not necessarily those of any organization
of which he is a member. atomicsteve@gmail.com
and Twitter: @SteveAhlquist.