Introducing the 4th Amendment Protection Act

The 4th Amendment Protection Act is our opportunity to defend the Bill of Rights, stop unwarranted searches of innocent, law-abiding citizens and stand up against Big Brother.

The best part?  It’s a bill to be introduced in your STATE, and doesn’t rely on Congress, the Courts, the President – or the NSA.  It’s about protecting the 4th Amendment whether they want us to or not.

In many ways, the NSA’s spying program relies on cooperation, assistance, or partnerships with states and local communities.  Information-sharing, use of precious resources, university research and more – with some resistance in our states, the NSA is going to have an extremely difficult time carrying out the programs they’re currently running.

Some examples:  Utah is providing the NSA with millions of gallons of water.  Texas provides electricity.  Augusta, Georgia handles things water and sewage treatment. In almost every state, fusion centers operate and receive information to share with local law enforcement, and major universities partner with the NSA to provide critical research and recruiting grounds for future analysts.

While one might think that the NSA can pull off all their data collection without this kind of state and local help, the facts show the opposite.  As far back as 2006, the NSA itself started acknowledging serious issues with resources when it maxed out the Baltimore-area power grid.    And from there, the new San Antonio, Texas data center was born.

FACT:  Without our help, the NSA just doesn’t have the manpower or the resources to do what it wants to do.


On a state level, the 4th Amendment Protection Act bans your state from all of these activities, and more.  While it doesn’t physically shut down the NSA, it creates what James Madison considered “obstructions which the federal government would be hardly willing to encounter.” (federalist #46).

Here are some examples:

  • Hitting their Achilles Heel:  NSA needs resources, and if your state has a data center (or “other” location), the act would ban the state from providing those resources – as is currently happening in most every NSA location.
  • De-Coupling State/Local Law Enforcement from the Federal Police State:  One of the greatest dangers of constant spying is turning your local law enforcement into a federal police force.  By banning your state from receiving information from the NSA (or any other federal agency) when it is obtained without warrant, you de-couple your state from the national police state.  The NSA is currently funneling information to local law enforcement via the Special Operations Division (SOD) and Fusion Centers.
  • Restricting their Research Capabilities:  The NSA has partnered with 166 universities around the country.  In these locations, their is significant research being done which will help the NSA expand its capabilities.  The schools also create a natural fertile ground for NSA analyst recruitment.  State universities would be banned from this practice.
  • Penalizing Corporations:  While many NSA locations rely heavily on state and local governments to operate, in some areas corporations can and do fill the gap.  The Act would create the potential for sanctions on the corporations that partner with unconstitutional spying.


The act is based on the universally-accepted “anti-commandeering doctrine.”  This is the principle that the states (and their political subdivisions) do not need to take any action to help the federal government carry out any of its acts, laws, rules, regulations or other programs.  NSA spying – included.

Whether it’s experts on the left, the right, or in the middle – all agree with this doctrine.  There is absolutely zero serious dispute.

Continue at Introducing the 4th Amendment Protection Act | Tenth Amendment CenterTenth Amendment Center.

If you like the work here then please donate today.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Subscribe by email and never miss a post.