Robert Brown, a national speaker on constitutional topics associated with the John Birch Society, will deliver the keynote address for the Constitution Party’s Spring National Committee Meeting later this month. The event will also feature appearances from several local figures.
The Constitution Party of New Hampshire, which is hosting the National Committee, announced Brown’s keynote address on social media. The National Committee of the Constitution Party will meet at the Best Western Executive Court Inn & Conference Center in Manchester on April 25 and 26. Early information provided by the party indicated that the keynote speech is scheduled for the Friday portion.
According to the John Birch Society, Brown is from Utah and serves as a field coordinator and regional field director for the organization, in addition to being one of its national speakers. While it is not yet known what Brown’s keynote address will cover, he is currently delivering lectures on two specific topics: the risks of an Article V convention to amend the United States Constitution and the doctrine of nullification as a means to uphold constitutional governance.
In addition to Brown, the state affiliate has also announced appearances by several New Hampshire-based activists. These include Dan Richard, an advocate for election integrity and constitutional scholar; Michelle Levell, a school choice advocate and director of Granite State Home Educators; and Anne Marie Banfield, an education policy analyst and activist focused on parental rights and academic transparency.
A full agenda has yet to be provided, though the party is also hosting a silent auction to help raise funds and is offering National Committee members an optional tour.
Nuna – Forgot…The Supreme Court has declared that nullification is defiance of and an attack on the Constitution and no federal judge will recognize it. So forget about trying to use nullification as a matter of common law – it won’t work.
Check out: ? Cooper v. Aaron (1958). This is the clearest rejection of nullification. Arkansas officials tried to resist desegregation after Brown v. Board of Education. The Court unanimously said: “No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it. … The federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution, and … the interpretation of the 14th Amendment enunciated by this Court in the Brown case is the supreme law of the land. It is not open to the states to nullify decisions of this Court.”
Nullification = unconstitutional.
?
? Ableman v. Booth (1859)
Wisconsin tried to nullify the Fugitive Slave Act by releasing a prisoner held under it. The Court smacked that down:
“No State judge or court has authority … to interfere with or control the marshal or any other officer of the United States in the discharge of his duties under the laws of the United States. … The Constitution and laws of the United States are supreme and cannot be controlled by State laws.”
? McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Not about nullification directly, but Chief Justice John Marshall firmly stated the principle:
“The government of the Union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action … The states have no power, by taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner control the operations of the constitutional laws enacted by Congress.”
?
? Summary
• Nullification has no legal standing — SCOTUS has consistently said states cannot cancel federal laws.
• The Supremacy Clause (Article VI) makes federal law supreme.
• From slavery (Ableman) to desegregation (Cooper), the Court has treated nullification as outright defiance of the Constitution.
Nuna – You are repeating th myths that the Birch society and other right wing extremist groups put out for anyone who doesn’t know the constitution to believe. The article V convention is NOT a “constitutional convention “in any way pshape or form. It is a “propposing “convention – to propose amendments to the constitution to be discussed, debated, and then voted on at a gathering of 34 states or more, then if passed at the cnvention, to be sent to the states to ratify or not. NOTHING can be done to the constitution at this convention. I refer you to the site headed by Robert Natelson – https://articlevinfocenter.com. If you don’t know Natelson he is the most quoted of historical experts on the cosntitution by scortus. Go to his site and read the many articles that he has written on various topics dealing with article V. Enjoy the education – it is eye opening and you will see how you have been hornswoggled by disinformation specialists.
Robert Brown is NOT an expert on the Constitution. He is a fomer salesman who says he is an expert because he reads. Yes he told the South dakota legislature that he can read. Well so can I and have read extensively but like brown I have never appeared before a court, told a judge my opinion on the constitution, and I do not have a law degree – nor can you really understand the law unless you have a firm grounding in common law procedures, and know latin as most of the terminology in law is in latin. PIN BROWN DOWN – ask about his education, which judges has he testified before, etc. Know that his $10,000 challenge has been debunked by at least two men that I know of and Brown has yet to pay off. One was Tom McGillvray of MT and a senator in Billings, and Kenn Quinn – see this video and you will see that you should find another speaker: Call QUinn: https://www.youtube.com/@allthingsarticlev2814
Know also that the delegates to the 1787 convention had oaths of commission which can be read online and the 1787 convention was NOT a run away as he and the Birch scoeity claim. NOr can states use “nullification” to fight the government as SCOTUS has declared it is defiance of the constitution and is illegal. NO FEDERAL JUDGE will recognize it. He is a phony expert. If you want a real one. contact Robert Natelson, https://articlevinfocenter.com. He has been consulted 26 times by the supreme court who uses his opinions for historical research and the constitution and especially article V which Brown denigrates stupidly as it is something the Founders wanted future generations to us. There is NO risk and even Antonin Scalia said he would like to try it.
CP members at the meeting in NH will be on the home turf of the new secretary of the CP National Committee. — she’s a hottie!
“a national speaker on constitutional topics associated with the John Birch Society, will deliver the keynote address for the Constitution Party’s Spring National Committee Meeting”
Awesome!
“Brown is from Utah”
Oh dear! Well, let’s hope that the Utah branch of the John Birch Society has not yet been hijacked by a mormon cult of Russophobic warhawks and fallout-shelter hucksters like the Utah’s “Constitution Party”-in-name-only has.
“lectures on two specific topics: the risks of an Article V convention to amend the United States Constitution and the doctrine of nullification as a means to uphold constitutional governance”
Very nice! Both are incredibly important and relevant subjects, now that we have RINOs in power who naively* believe Article V conventions won’t backfire and that nullification is criminal, seditious and/or treasonous.
* James Madison knew better, and repeatedly wrote quite strongly against holding a second constitutional convention, e.g. (far from exhaustive):
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0224
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-11-02-0243