Who better to manage a county’s natural resources, economy and living conditions than the locals who know their neighbors, can best protect their environment, and understand the rights and needs of their community?
Things are heating up, and, no, that’s not a reference to the three-digit temperature readings across the country this summer. It’s acknowledging the rising tempers of citizens being forced to endure regulation upon regulation coming down from the Biden administration restricting access to everything from public lands to gas stoves, air conditioning and even light bulbs.
The looming question is what to do about it when Congress is dragging its feet despite the barrage of “investigations” and states refusing to step-in with their constitutional authority to “throw the bums out” – the bums being federal agencies.
In a limited sense, counties have attempted to institute a version of home rule that has taken the form of decreeing “sanctuary” localities, be they municipalities or counties, and have come from two opposite creeds.
Application of home rule is determined by each state’s constitution
On the one side, local governments have declared themselves a sanctuary for illegal activity, most often protecting illegal aliens from being deported or charged with crimes that end up being applied only to legal citizens. On the other hand, counties have declared themselves protectorates for Second Amendment rights to bear arms.
The difference between the two is that local governments haven’t jurisdiction to absolve illegal entrants to the country (migrants, e.g. illegal aliens) of their federal crimes. Counties do, however, have the power to enforce constitutional rights in the face of federal attempts to undermine those rights, such as the First and Second Amendments which federal agencies pushed to deny in the face of Covid and the administration’s engineered collapse of the border.
It must be understood that the application of home rule is determined by each state’s constitution, whether it is supported by statute or inherent in the state or federal constitution itself.
Here are some basic concepts to be considered regarding home rule:
“States have Home Rule through the Federal Constitution. Essentially the 10th Amendment is “Home Rule” for State governments, and since it and the 9th Amendment set forth:
Amendment IX “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. And.…
“Permit me to mention one great principle, the vital principle I may well call it, which diffuses animation and vigor through all the others. The principle I mean is this, that the supreme or sovereign power of the society resides in the citizens at large; and that, therefore, they always retain the right of abolishing, altering, or amending their constitution, at whatever time, and in whatever manner, they shall deem expedient.”James Wilson, Founding Father, Lectures on Law: Volume 1 Chapter 1 page 17.
“The purpose of home rule is to allow for local solutions to local issues and problems. A municipality with home rule status can exercise any power and perform any function unless it is specifically prohibited from doing so by state law.”
Home Rule–whether the Dillon Rule or statutorily or constitutionally addressed–or not at all
States have either adopted a method for implementation of home rule–whether the Dillon Rule or statutorily or constitutionally addressed–or not at all, leaving the interpretation up to what is inferred by the United States Constitution. This brief publication offers an overview and a map of where individual states stand on the issue, particularly regarding Nebraska: