Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The federal courts have become the law breaking branch of the federal government. Congress can remove appelate jurisdiction of the USSC and jurisdiction of lower federal courts We the People Act(HR 3893 IH) and leave this issue with the states.

Article III, Section 2 - The Washington Times: Editorials/OP-ED In the 107th Congress (2001-2002), Congress used the authority of Article III, Section 2, clause 2 on 12 occasions to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts.

  1. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to break as many laws as they have, why does the Constitution prohibit them from being involved in the law making process? Why did Marshall have to derive the doctrine of judicial review? Why wasn't it explicitly stated in the Constitution?
  2. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to amend the Constition, why does the Constitution prohibit them from being involved in the amendment process?
  3. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to enforce their own opinion, why does the Constitution leave that option with the President?
  4. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to be equal to or above the written Constition, why does the Constitution state, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land…. and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution."

The Foundation for the National Archives states that, "The Virginia Declaration of Rights strongly influenced Thomas Jefferson in writing the first part of the Declaration of Independence. It later provided the foundation for the Bill of Rights."

The Virginia Declaration of Rights states, " That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life…."

Thomas Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independence, acknowledged the source of Rights and expressed the fundamental purpose of government: "....all Men are created equal...endowed by their Creator with...unalienable Rights, that among these are Life....to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted...."

Robert C. Cannada writing in the The National Lawyers Association Review, Winter 1996, connected the Declaration of Independence to the U.S. Constitution: "The National Lawyers Association takes the position that the practical effect of the legal connection or relationship between the Declaration and the Constitution is that the Constitution is to be interpreted in the light of the principles set forth in the Declaration.[...] The Preamble introduces and explains the purpose of The U.S. Constitution, and links it to The Declaration of Independence." The Preface to the United States Code - Annotated states that "this code is the official restatement in convenient form of the general and permanent laws of the United States in force December 7, 1925...."

The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution states," We the People of the United States, in Order to....secure the Blessings of Liberty to...our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution...."

Amendment V - "No person shall be...deprived of life...without due process of law...."

In First Things, January 2003: Constitutional Persons, Robert H. Bork stated that, "Science and rational demonstration prove that a human exists from the moment of conception."

Article 3 of the U.S. Constitution provides the means for Congress to overthrow the law-breaking branch of the federal government and allow states to mend their broken laws. In the 107th Congress (2001-2002), Congress used the authority of Article III, Section 2, clause 2 on 12 occasions to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts.

We the People Act (HR 3893 IH) was only supported by two members of the U.S. House, and virtually unheard of, or promoted by the pro-life constituency.

It is past time to terminate the rule of broken law contained in the unconscionable and unconstitutional edicts of the U.S. Supreme court.

We the People Act needs to be reintroduced and passed by the 109th Congress and restore the rule of Law.

1 posted on 12/31/2004 3:43:37 PM PST by Ed Current
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Ed Current

This is an amazing article. One minion of Hades, Blackmun, kept detailed records...including on how another, Kennedy, sold his very soul.


2 posted on 12/31/2004 4:01:13 PM PST by Giant Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current
His papers shed new light on how narrow that rescue was, turning on a late flip-flop by a single member of the Court.

If these papers show anything they show that 40-plus million souls have been murdered due to a single unelected human being who changed his mind at the last moment.

Blackmun's papers are compelling proof that appointing someone to a position of unaccountable power, from which they cannot be realistically removed for the remainder of their lives, is no way to run a free Republic.

It's time that the American people reevaluated the Constitutional role of the Judiciary in American politics.

3 posted on 12/31/2004 4:07:13 PM PST by Noachian (A Democrat, by definition, is a Socialist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current

It doesn't surprise me about Kennedy at all.

Two "Catholic" justices were largely responsible for Roe v. Wade. One was Justice Brennan, who was the real author of Roe v. Wade and who used Blackmun, who was actually rather stupid, as his sock puppet. The other was Kennedy.

The bishops have a heavy burden on their consciences for not having dealt with these two Catholic justices as they should have been dealt with.

And let's not forget Sandra Day O'Connor, supposedly a Republican, and David Souter, also a Republican nominee, probably the worst mistake since Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren.


4 posted on 12/31/2004 4:07:58 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current

bump


8 posted on 12/31/2004 4:28:30 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Torie

ping


14 posted on 12/31/2004 5:13:06 PM PST by Fatalis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current
In Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002), he [Justice Kennedy] wrote that the Constitution prohibited Congress from criminalizing computer-generated images of child pornography. In 2003, he took up his pen again to write the Court's opinion striking down state laws against homosexual sodomy in Lawrence v. Texas.

Such sterling service to America. How should he be rewarded for such service (assuming anyone can get close enough to deliver the reward)?

17 posted on 12/31/2004 5:33:59 PM PST by BenLurkin (Big government is still a big problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood; StonyBurk; little jeremiah
The Origin and Scope of Roe -- Professor Douglas W. Kmiec presents letters and records of correspondence between members of the Roe court that reveal questionable motivations as well as a fundamental disrespect for normal principles of judicial restraint.

Rehnquist, "Roe V. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973):

"To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. There apparently was no question concerning the validity of this provision or of any of the other state statutes when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. The only conclusion possible from this history is that the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the States the power to legislate with respect to this matter." caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=410&invol=113

FT January 2003: Constitutional Persons, Robert H. Bork made the following comments about Roe v. Wade:

"Blackmun invented a right to abortion....Roe had nothing whatever to do with constitutional interpretation. The utter emptiness of the opinion has been demonstrated time and again, but that, too, is irrelevant. The decision and its later reaffirmations simply enforce the cultural prejudices of a particular class in American society, nothing more and nothing less. For that reason, ROE is impervious to logical or historical argument; it is what some people, including a majority of the justices, want, and that is that....Science and rational demonstration prove that a human exists from the moment of conception....Scalia is quite right that the Constitution has nothing to say about abortion."

21 posted on 01/01/2005 4:43:30 AM PST by Ed Current (U.S. Constitution, Article 3 has no constituency to break federal judicial tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current

Thank you for another most Excellent read. NEVER a fan of
Blackmum, NOR Roe v. Wade. Though when I was a Christian in
Name Only -and then only when convienent, I traded into the
LIE that it is a "Womans issue" than no man had any right to comment upon it. One recent author (RobertBork?)said
the majority of the supreme Court Justices seem to be gnostics at best. Blackmum--like Hugo Black-seemed to be black hearted Communist to the core.


24 posted on 01/01/2005 6:24:02 AM PST by StonyBurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MHGinTN; Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; ...
Reference work - Bookmark PING,er

Please let me know if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

29 posted on 01/01/2005 11:08:31 AM PST by cpforlife.org (The Missing Key of The Pro-Life Movement is at www.CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current
Kennedy is Wormwood to Blackmun's Screwtape.
30 posted on 01/01/2005 11:10:06 AM PST by cpforlife.org (The Missing Key of The Pro-Life Movement is at www.CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current
Justice unjustice Kennedy's 'feel good' is more important to Kennedy than the tens of millions of alive humans he has been complicit in killing. May he find his just reward 'hereafter' as a defender and enabler of serial killing of millions of human beings.

One cannot respect a man so weak that people's opinion of him drive his rulings on a court where millions of lives are at risk. Kennedy's character has a major flaw ... he has no real principles in life, only longing for acceptance by those he worships (like the twisted Blackmun). Well, the serial killers and their worshippers must have a high judgement for him, but I doubt he will escape judgement by God just because millions of lost souls love him.

Subpreme Court unjustice Kennedy is the worst kind of judicial activist, ruling and reruling in order to garner favor rather than follow the Constitution he swore to defend and uphold. But he's too mealy mouthed to realize his wrongness so he goes right ahead continuing to be an activist in 'sheep's clothing'.

31 posted on 01/01/2005 1:59:59 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ed Current; 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; ...


38 posted on 01/03/2005 5:55:04 PM PST by Coleus (Let us pray for the 125,000 + victims of the tsunami and the 126,000 aborted Children killed daily)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson