As reported on FoxNews, Republican Senator Enzi and Republican Congressman Bishop have introduced an Amendment to the Constitution, the “Repeal Amendment,” which provides:
Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed.
I.e., two-thirds of the states can repeal a given federal law or regulation. This Amendment, I think, has little chance of passing; and although it would be a move in the right direction, it is far too weak. As I noted in earlier posts, ((Michael Boldin on Randy Barnett and Federalism and Randy Barnett’s Proposed “Federalism Amendment”, Randy Barnett’s Federalism Amendment, and Randy Barnett’s “Federalism Amendment”–A Counterproposal.)) discussing a similar proposal by Randy Barnett, ((See also Randy Barnett’s Who Is Afraid of the Repeal Amendment? and The Case for a ‘Repeal Amendment’.)) a far better approach would be Amendments explicitly recognizing (a) the constitutional right of states to secede; and (b) the right of individual states to nullify any federal law, action, policy or regulation from being enforced within the state’s jurisdiction (on this, of course, see Tom Woods’s Nullification).