“A republic, if you can keep it.”…Benjamin Franklin
By Paul Preston, President New California State
One state government in the Union of States is not fulfilling its compact obligations as a member of the Union of States we call the United States of America.
Care to guess which state?
John F. McManus on November 6, 2000 writing in the New American wrote the following regarding the 1787 Constitutional Convention:
“The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
California became the 31st state on November 9, 1850 when the California Constitution of 1849 was approved by congress and a compact declared between the “the people of California” and the “Union of States” known as the United States of America.
For those who don’t know about compacts the short discussion is a compact is a government “covenant” with the people of the United States regardless of the government found operating in each state.
When the Founding Fathers realized there needed to be an inseparable agreement between the states and the federal government they looked to the bible and realized if God could make a “covenant” with Israel why couldn’t government make a covenant with the people as a compact one in which the state and all its elements would endure forever as a member of the Union regardless of the fashion of government a state may faulter into if they failed to a “Keep a Republic”.
From the Federalists
“Nor may a state read herself out of a compact which she has ratified and to which Congress has consented by pleading that under the state’s constitution as interpreted by the highest state court she had lacked power to enter into such an agreement and was without power to meet certain obligations thereunder”.
U.S. Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts stoutly rejected Calhoun’s ideas in his second reply to Senator Robert Hayne of South Carolina in 1830, saying that the federal Constitution is “the people’s Constitution, the people’s government, made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people . . . . the State legislatures . . . however sovereign, are yet not sovereign over the people.”
Newsom and his cronies have now admitidly eaten the forbidden fruit of a democracy in which the founders loathed a state might do at some point. The Founders had an answer for this in Article IV, Section 3 the New States Clause:
Article IV, Section 3: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
There are only two reasons a new state would even consider an Article IV, Section 3 split. The state was too large or the state government itself was not providing for the people what is found in Article IV, Section 4 the Guarantee Clause:
Article IV–Section 4 The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Since January 15, 2018 New California State’s reading of our Declaration of Independence and over the course of 190 weeks where New Californians read 190 Grievances against the government of California we have stated the state of California no longer provides for a the Article VI, Section 4 guarantees all Citizens of the United State are to have provided for by “their” government.
From last page of Chapter 2, Grievance 95 the long repeated phases were stated in the previous 189 Grievances:
Insurrection
The government of California, the current socialist governor/dictator and mono-party system along with local officials are following a coordinated design with the intent to actively engage in “Acts of Insurrection” against the U.S. Constitution.
The Insurrection Act of 1807 and the Emergency Economic Powers Act are United States federal laws that govern the ability of the President of the United States to deploy military troops within the United States to put down lawlessness insurrection, and rebellion.
Acts of Secession
The California government in conjunction with the socialist state executive, instituted wherever the current socialist governor/dictator has usurped power has actively engaged in “Acts of Secession” and have created a reign of terror on United States Citizens living in California with the intent to secede from the United States of America to thus destroy the very Union of States which secures our Liberty and Freedom.
Abdication of Authority
Betrayal by the sitting socialist governor/dictator of California the mono-party legislature and local elected officials is evidence of “Abdication of their Responsibilities of Authority and Sovereignty” over the Citizens of the United States living in California State.
In April of 2022 New California declared the State of California in “Default” stating in part:
State of New California
Statement of Facts
The people of California are suffering from a tyrannical state government which fails to provide a republican form of governance enables and supports across its southern border the invasion of the United States of America by illegal foreign nationals and protects vicious criminals who commit outrageous acts of violence upon the Citizens of America all caused by a government of and for a mono-party system lead by a tyrannical dictator who openly defies federal law.
You may read the entire Notice of Default HERE:
