By Matthew Hayward July 13, 2025 Let me say this clearly: The National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia, an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court’s decision in Perpich v. Department of Defense rewrote the rules. But legal does not mean constitutional. Gradualism does not legitimize usurpation. You do not get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What is happening now, federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent, is blasphemous. It is an insult to the very spirit of th...

As we navigate the intricate web of our modern society, the concept of sanctuary jurisdictions continues to make headlines. Traditionally, these places – known as sanctuary cities, counties, or states – are where local or regional law enforcement limits their cooperation with federal authorities, especially on controversial issues like immigration. However, this sanctuary concept has recently morphed into a broader, more powerful movement encompassing a range of constitutional issues, from Second Amendment rights and marijuana decriminalization to the refusal to enforce mask mandates and business closures related to COVID-19. Today, we'll examine the intriguing notion of a constitutional sanctuary from a libertarian perspective, focusing on individual liberties, limited government, and personal choice. We'll also delve into the critical role of Constitutional Sheriffs, resistance against not just federal but also state overreaches, and the implications of non-compliance with co...