Posted on 07/05/2015 7:44:39 PM PDT by BlackjackPershing
You should have argued the case instead of the idiots we had .
Thanks. I’m taking my case to the American People. They’re the ones that need convincing. Them and the states.
I’ve let the feds go for now. They’re feral and dangerous. The feral feds. The wild animal catchers are the states who need to get with the program. The COS is a long-term effort that may or may not bear the fruit needed. But states can stand up and nullify unconstitutional federal acts NOW.
Let’s do our best to convince them.
Agreed and if you don’t mind I will use some of what you have written.
Please do, but cite the cases and sources I cited where you can. Looks like you do that anyway.
Where’s our three-cornered hats? Feels like another revolution forming.
Says who? You? Us? Sure that is a reasonable position to take and I share it but where is this documented and agreed to by the Supreme Court? There are no detailed guidelines for how they should interpret the Constitution. Seven communists could be placed into the Supreme Court and they could choose to completely ignore the Constitution all together if they wanted to. However our system of government was designed with a remedy for that and it is called ...impeachment.
Common sense, for one. If city counsel makes a law making it illegal to run a red light, then how do you interpret that law? You START by the actual text of the law. If there’s some question THEN you look at evidence of intent like discussion, statements and debate among those who voted leading up to the passing of the law to find out what they intended. Otherwise, laws incorporated by their language and intent mean nothing. That is common sense. SCOTUS has long-since proven that language means little to them and they have long since abandoned even the appearance of basing their decisions on any kind of constitutional basis.
There is nothing in the Constitution that grants unilateral power to the feds to interpret the Constitution nor is there anything prohibiting the people and the states from interpreting the Constitution. To presume unilateral federal commandeering of constitutional interpretation is like telling the fox after he’s broken his chain to be good & not eat the hens. No, it’s the owner’s job to reattach the chain to the fox. WE are the owners of OUR freedom and OUR Constitution. It is up to the American People through their states to reattach the constitutional chain to the fox. Since the fox has grown into some kind of T-Rex who will not be controlled, the states must begin by circling the wagons and fighting defensively for their own safety and survival.
As far as remedies go, sure impeachment is a remedy. But like most remedies being proposed, that remedy depends on the feds imposing those penalties on itself. That’s why its not happening. In the meantime, there is NOTHING in the Constitution to prevent states form acting against the tyranny of unconstitutional federal acts. The Supremacy Clause backs it and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments confirm it.
“[I]n declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned, and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the Constitution, have that rank. Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written Constitutions, that a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.” Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 180 (1803).
Jim - “common sense” doesn’t mean squat in the legal word.
In 10,000 paragraphs or less - where is it defined how the Supreme Court must interpret the Constitution?
It isn’t.
That’s why you have to look at things like Judeo-Christian history of western law right up to our founding and find that things like common sense and reasonableness were the standards for things like interpreting laws.
> What the federal government can do, however, is withhold federal funds (taken from the states) unless the states knuckle under to its edicts.
Tell the feds to keep their money and go pound sand. Find another way o raise funds if you need them or trim the fat.
> Try not baking a cake for sodomites and see what happens.
A chocolate Ex-Lax cake should do the trick....
Where’s our three-cornered hats? Feels like another revolution forming.
Thanks for the very informative post above.
You’re welcome & thank you.
To me, the challenge is convincing the American People.
The fox (the feds) has chewed off his chain (the Constitution) and is wreaking havoc in the hen house (the free market economy where all our golden eggs are laid). Meanwhile the owner of the farm (the American people) is fast asleep and the fox has grown into some kind of T-Rex.
I guess it’s up to us to wake up the American People who in turn, beginning with defensive individual state resistance against the $4 trillion monster, have the job of killing the T-Rex and getting the constitutional chain back on the fox.
I think that might actually be helping them.
Unfortunately the states have come to rely on federal handouts instead of budgeting their own money from their own people (plus, of course the feds just confiscate money right out of our paychecks so the states can’t get their hands on it). This has caused more trouble than anything else. Always follow the money.
bump!
Hope the states tell the courts to go pound sand.
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.