One of the hallmark issues of the Dan Fisher Campaign is a commitment to end selective abortion in Oklahoma. The objective is often expressed in tandem with the campaign's commitment to restore constitutional state sovereignty, as expressed in the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution.
This is not as unusual as one might think. Currently, California is defying federal policies on immigration and marijuana policies & statutes.
South Dakota is also challenging a 1992 SCOTUS ruling on sales tax collections from out-of-state sellers doing business with South Dakota residents.
South Dakota's legislature passed a statutory bill and their governor signed it. Now the state has filed suit with SCOTUS to seek a reconsideration of the 1992 Quill vs North Dakota decision which forbids a state from collecting taxes on transactions not occurring within the state.
Quill is not a perfect analogy, but it shows us enough of what a state might do to assert dominion.
The Warren Court of 1973 said that new facts would necessitate a further review at a later date. But 45 years later, we are still waiting for the courts to accept a case and conduct a full review. North Dakota legislators attempted the same course of action in 2015, but the high court just ignored their appeal of the 8th circuit decision; a decision which clearly begged the SCOTUS to conduct the full review.
But the Dan Fisher Campaign is prepared to nullify federal rulings on this issue. Tenth Amendment proponents believe that the 10th amendment has been violated by the federal govt., including all 3 branches. Federal courts are supporting the right of federal administrations to enforce federal restrictions and federal statutes, even where the US constitution does not delegate such authority to any federal entity.
A Lesson From Prohibition
Dan Fisher has a large task ahead of him, if he is to catch hold with the voters. This commonwealth understanding is very foreign to many of the electorate.