A PERMANENT ANSWER TO SUPREME COURT AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ABUSES (Hostage)

Free Republic Exclusive ^ | June 25, 2015 | Hostage

[Hostage]

There are 7,398 elected members of state legislatures. They can be considered as a backup representational body for WE THE PEOPLE.

Our representation through Congress is LOST.

Only one delegate from each of the 99 state legislative bodies is needed. Out of these 99 delegates, only 66 from 34 states are needed to propose Article V amendments.

Conservatives and republicans control 66 legislative bodies.

Therefore, all of what is discussed here CAN BE DONE! AND IT MUST BE DONE NOW!

Today's Supreme Court release together with the imminent ruling release on redefining marriage should provide the spark to ignite Article V tinder.

Find out who are your state representatives and call then TODAY!

Congress will never do anything about this!

IT'S TIME FOR ARTICLE V NOW OR NEVER!

[Tzimisce]

They’re not following the Constitution as it’s written now.

What will make them obey new statutes?

[gspurlock]

There is another solution to SCOTUS, namely that the Supreme Court Justices are not given their positions for life, but only during “good behavior”.

I do not think it a big stretch to consider violating the Constitution bad behavior and remove them from the bench.

But that would require a Congress that respects the Constitution, and to that end, it looks like only an Article 5 convention can help us to make that happen.

[Logical me]

IT'S TIME FOR ARTICLE V NOW OR NEVER!

It is too late! America now has joined most of the rest of the world as a communists dictatorship. Will never be reversed except by civil war.

[chris37]

I think we are way, way, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay beyond that now.

Gun control laws have no effect on the lawless.

Constitutional laws have no effect on the lawless.

This society is terminally ill.

[Paladin2]

Forget the TPA, just pass the TPP. Get it all over with so we can all just move along after seeing the wreckage.

[nathanbedford]

So far it seems to me that opposition to Article V boils down to about four objections:

1. It won't work -so don't bother trying.

2. It won't work, even if it does work, because "they" will undo it, ignore it, or somehow overrule it, so don't bother trying.

3. It will work, but don't try it because it will work only for the other side.

4. No opinion on whether it will work or will not work, but the Constitution we have is just fine so the solution offered by the Constitution itself in Article V should be ignored in favor of redoubling our efforts and doing more of the same every election cycle because this time we will get different results.

Which category are you in?

[Hostage]

Please ping the list set this thing on fire!

[central_va]

u r good.

[thescourged1]

Spot on.

We would have to be a nation of law-abiders for this to work, and we no longer are, at the governing levels. States themselves need to decide what their own course should be. I'm no neo-confederate, but Jeff Davis is probably chuckling at us right now.

[Wilum]

Me?

5. Go For It Anyway!

[Hostage]

The federal government can choose not to follow the Constitution, but it does not matter.

Because Amendment 28 allows the States to ignore the federal government and there’s nothing the federal government can effectively do about it.

[Tzimisce]

How are you going to make them follow new amendments when they’re not following the old amendments?

How are you going to do it?

Especially when the Supreme Court just said today that the government doesn’t have to follow its own laws.

You need to have an answer for that question - or yes, it is a waste a time.

[nathanbedford]

States themselves need to decide what their own course should be.

I thought that was precisely what Article V does.

[Hostage]

Yes your thoughts are in the fair zone and Mark Levin addresses your thoughts.

In my view Amendment 28 neuters the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US for those reading) so term limits or removal provisions for justices are not needed. But I am not against such considerations.

[INVAR]

I’ll say this again -

While Article V is a NOBLE cause - ARTICLE V WILL NOT SAVE US FROM WHERE WE HAVE ARRIVED.

The current regime and dictatorship has made the Constitution IRRELEVANT.

More Amendments intended to LIMIT and RESTRAIN the power of Washington will be as ignored and discarded and ruled against as the current limits to restrain the power of the Federal Beast have been.

No sir, the solution is NOT going to come via civil means - because you cannot restrain lawless, tyrannical and uncivil people by civil means.

Our course of action at this point is the same as it was for the Colonists in 1775: REFUSE TO COMPLY WITH TYRANNY.

RESIST.

IT IS TIME WE DO THAT.

If we refuse to comply - the true vicious nature of this burgeoning tyranny will be revealed, and then we will have THE MORAL AUTHORITY TO RESIST by every and all means as it was for the Colonists.

[strings6459]

The states take more power and take their usurped power back and use it, nullifying as much as possible of the federal overreach. No one expects the federal government to act any differently.

[Hostage]

Good exposition of what the opposition consistently uses.

[LucyT]

.

[semimojo]

Which category are you in?

I'm not against it, but I think people are a little hung up on the process. The big hurdle will be getting consensus on the content of proposed amendments. Levin has his proposals but the only one that seems to be nearly universal in the states that are considering it is the BBA. Even then, there are dozens of variations.

I don't fear the "runaway" scenario but think it's more likely that the convention won't produce agreement. I'd rather have the focus more on building consensus on the amendments than on the process.