As near as I can determine these people believe that if you can convince your state legislators to assert rights guaranteed to the individual states by the Tenth Amendment you are not a legitimate part of the political process. Apparently only those people that advocate for the infringement of states rights are legitimate.
They haven’t publically proposed a punishment yet but I suspect they have thought about it.
Here is a sample:
The UA researchers identified what they termed the “Commerce Battering Ram Strategy,” a legal-political apparatus that “private lawmakers” – unelected individuals who thrust themselves into the political process – have developed to harness states’ legal powers in an attempt to break open federal laws.
“Using the Tenth Amendment as its core log, a Commerce Battering Ram mobilizes states to challenge the federal government,” Orbach said, adding that legislation and litigation are key to such mobilization.
In effect, individuals within the movement attempt to propel as many state laws as possible toward weakening the government’s control of guns, the research team said.
While it would appear that individuals within the movement are merely exercising their legal rights as citizens of the United States and participating in the democratic process, Orbach, Callahan and Lindemenn all argue that that use of battering rams “is not equivalent to legitimate participation in the democratic process.”
“Commerce Battering Ram”? That sounds like a phrase straight from Josh Sugarmann’s playbook like “assault weapon”.