Posted on 05/03/2020 4:23:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” That’s unambiguous. Not “pretty unambiguous,” just unambiguous. Full stop. Yet governors across the country are ignoring or suspending almost every one of those rights enumerated at the top of the Bill of Rights, with little to no pushback from the press, which just happens to be the only part of the first two amendments not under assault.
It’s actually not under assault -- it’s gone -- suspended indefinitely in the name of “the common good.” Governors have declared coronavirus emergencies and wiped clean the rights our nation was founded for the purpose of putting those rights beyond the reach of government.
These suspensions were not done by vote; they were done with the stroke of a pen. Constitutionally, they can’t be done by either. There is no provision of the Constitution allowing for the waiving of rights under any condition, but most legislatures are content to sit back and watch this all proceed without their fingerprints anywhere near it.
Governors made a point of canceling Easter services, even at drive-in churches set up in parking lots. “You’re not allowed to leave your home,” they declared. The irony of placing innocent Americans under house arrest while releasing prisoners in the name of “compassion” was lost on journalists too busy expressing indignation that people might want to worship even in the face of a pandemic.
The same journalists were perplexed by why those same innocent Americans might want to exercise their Second Amendment rights, another right with which we are born that shall “not be infringed” that is being infringed all over the place without concern from the media. “Gun stores are non-essential” in a time prisons are being emptied seems like a set-up for a bad joke, not a public policy.
If you speak out against these usurpations of your rights, you will be condemned as “not caring” for the vulnerable. If you couple your right to speak with others in the public square by assembling to magnify your voice, you risk arrest or a fine, a hefty one in a lot of states. These steps are designed to quash your right to petition government for redress of your grievances – the government nullifies your other rights through the magic of a Montblanc pen (the powerful aren’t going to use a Bic, especially when taxpayers are picking up the tab).
Meanwhile, the press remains unencumbered by any of this. Unlike the people footing the bill and taking the hit, journalists are “essential employees.” Long having thought themselves better than everyone else, Democrats with press credentials happily condemn people for refusing to do what they’re told to do by people lacking the right to do it.
“The Constitution is not a suicide pact,” they say, but neither is it a permission slip for the murder of rights. Our rights cannot simply be waived in the face of anything. From the beginning of the country, government has been trying to do just that.
It’s the nature of government and those in power to attempt to amass as much of that power as possible, and the only way for that to happen is to take it from the people. Our Founding Fathers knew this and wrote the Constitution to guard against it as best it could be done, and still some of them were guilty of it themselves (see the Alien and Sedition Acts).
Since then, these incursions into our rights have generally been done with a small hammer and chisel, chipping away a little piece here, a tiny piece there, out of public view in legislation with pleasant-sounding names on matters of public concern: “We must fix this problem” *chip, chip chip* - “If it saves just one life” *chip, chip, chip* - etc.
These tend to go unnoticed for what they are, overwhelmed by the sense of urgency they’re generally coupled with. But this time, these same “caring leaders” aren’t using a hammer and chisel; they’re using dynamite. “This is going to change how we live our lives going forward,” is commonly heard now. That’s not how rights work.
The Constitution does not grant us rights, it acknowledges rights with which we are born. We can choose not to exercise them, but they cannot be taken away.
That’s not enough for many of these governors and their cheerleaders in the press. When governors started asking people to stay home, we did. We understood the reasoning. Then those requests became orders. Nothing much changed. Most people wanted to stave off the predicted horrors, so those orders were seen as akin to ordering the Sun to rise in the east. It was already happening, so it was basically meaningless.
But then either the predictions were wrong or compliance accomplished its mission, depending on your perspective, and people wanted to go outside. People wanted to stop the destruction of their livelihoods and return to work. That’s when they noticed the boot of government on their throats.
Now they’re taking to the halls of capitals, to the streets. Police are being ordered to put down offenders demanding their liberty back. Many police departments are refusing, but an alarming number of them are complying. It was impossible just two months ago for the answer to the jailhouse question of, “What are you in for?” to be answered with, “I went to the beach,” yet this is the reality under many Democrat Governors.
We will wrestle our freedoms back and soon. When we do, it’s important to remember not only who took them and why, but who tried not to give them back. From Maine to Michigan, from Illinois to California, they were progressive Democrats. They didn’t see coronavirus as a tragedy. They saw it as an opportunity. As Hillary Clinton said last week, “this would be a terrible crisis to waste.”
This is the Democrats’ nature: they know better than you do what you need, they are better than you are, smarter than you. Coronavirus just allowed a peek into their minds. Individuals are irrelevant to the left, as are your rights. The Constitution is an obstacle to be overcome, by any means available, not the restraint on their power it was written to be. Remember that come November…or you soon won’t be allowed to say it.
Ironic, isn’t it? The ONLY freedom guaranteed under the First Amendment that is not under attack, is freedom of the press. Ironic, because it is not an individual right.
True, it SHOULD be an individual right. All of us have to right to a free press. We don’t! The press is a mouthpiece of the Democratic Party.
Yes it is an individual right. It is the right to communicate your opinions to a broad audience in writing.
In colonial days, anybody with a few dollars could go to a printer, have him print up a few hundred, or few thousand, copies of whatever screed he wanted, and distribute it publicly. You could write a book and self-publish it. Etc.
The First Amendment, as an individual right, is under attack by applying pressure to outlets which permit "incorrect information" to be disseminated. We must fight this.
Has anyone read their state constitution? Or the powers granted to the governors during a health crisis?
Americans are stupid.
Are we REALLY this ignorant??
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-x
I think they have the power. That really isn’t the issue. The question is whether they are adequately representing the people. That will he decided in November.
Constitutional Law is supreme.
The First Amendment is a power under the Constitution to check Congress.
The First Amendment pertains to Congress and by supremacy to all states.
The First Amendment is not dissected by the Tenth Amendment.
Because Governors are not subservient to Congress.
Elected officials should be schooled on the bill of rights and the constitution, apparently they know nothing about it and could care less in many instances. They spew their demands and restrictions and say it in such an authoritarian way to the public to let us know “dont question me and my authority” and the people for the most part dont know the bill of rights or the constitution either and the tin pot dictator rat governors and mayors know this know this.
Incorporation, in United States law, is the doctrine by which portions of the Bill of Rights have been made applicable to the states. When the Bill of Rights was ratified, the courts held that its protections extended only to the actions of the federal government and that the Bill of Rights did not place limitations on the authority of the state and local governments. However, the post-Civil War era, beginning in 1865 with the Thirteenth Amendment, which declared the abolition of slavery, gave rise to the incorporation of other Amendments, applying more rights to the states and people over time. Gradually, various portions of the Bill of Rights have been held to be applicable to the state and local governments by incorporation through the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 and the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870.<This is a perfect example of the law as written being misinterpreted when everyone involved in drafting that law is dead. It's obvious that the First Amendment only applied to the Federal Government. E.g. States could and did have an Official Religion in 1800.Prior to the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment and the development of the incorporation doctrine, the Supreme Court in 1833 held in Barron v. Baltimore that the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal, but not any state governments. Even years after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court in United States v. Cruikshank (1876) still held that the First and Second Amendment did not apply to state governments. However, beginning in the 1920s, a series of United States Supreme Court decisions interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to "incorporate" most portions of the Bill of Rights, making these portions, for the first time, enforceable against the state governments.
It's also obvious to me that most of the Amendments did apply to the States as they do not include the words: Congress shall make no law, but since all the guys who wrote this stuff are dead and now we have wise Latinas telling us that we native English speakers do not understand our own language.
ML/NJ
This is why the 2nd Amendment doesn’t limit a governmental body. It limits all governmental bodies.
Thanks for posting this. Federal, state, and local governments—but then, what about public schools? They can enforce dress codes that limit what students’ tee shirts can state.
Yes, and yes. And certainly the author of this dumbass article has NOT. Like it or not folks...your state governments DO have these powers. Want them limited?? Vote otherwise in the next and subsequent election(s).
I differ.
I participated in a ReopenMaryland road rally yesterday with a few hundred other patriots.
The governor threatened any state legislators who attended with arrest. See post 2 for the legislators response.
At the final stop, the police blocked the entrance to the rally point. Rally organizers found another location and redirected many people there.
At the final rally point, a United States Congressman was scheduled to speak. In a clear and absolute violation of the First Amendment, Local and state elected employees blocked a US CONGRESSMAN from addressing his constituents. I suspect there’s another lawsuit coming for that one.
The commanded=r of the State Police was quoted saying that he may issue retroactive citations against the non-gathering “law” the governor made up on his own with no legislative input.
The congressman promised to go to court with anyone who receives a citation because they were there to meet with him to redress a grievance.
On my back window I painted “There’s no * in the Constitution”
Actually, governors are not part of Congress, actually.
The news media is like Pravda attempting to control citizens.
They can’t. Until someone in “authority” arrests them for violating the Constitution and the Bill of Rights...they will. Tar and feathering along with running them out of town on a rail used to suffice. However, we are “civilized” now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.