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

To: badbass
Thanks, that's very helful. Care to elaborate?

In Andrew Jackson's day, the courts passed some law (I forget the details) that Jackson didn't want. He said, "great, they've had their say, now let them enforce it."

That was the "Trail of Tears" law. The Governor of Georgia illegally seized Cherokee land and expelled them to Oklahoma. The Cherokees took it to the Supreme Court and they won. Jackson issued his famous statement and did not interfere in the matter. It is the only time in U.S. history that that has ever happened. Are you saying that it is legal for a state to seize your land and hand it over to someone else?

If Florida's constitution is made up the same way, Jeb Bush should have just called the police and said, "stand down".

No he couldn't have. The police there were municipal police under the control of the mayor. The governor is not their boss.

I'm not sure Pres. Bush had the authority (states rights issues), but I do believe Gov. Bush probably did.

The President did not have any authority to act. The Governor's actions were similarly constrained by the state constitution. He issued his executive order and it was declared "unconstitutional" by the courts.


561 posted on 03/31/2005 11:19:03 AM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies ]


To: FreedomCalls

So you're saying that Abraham Lincoln should have been impeached for effectively usurping power from Congress during the Civil War?

What is power, anyway? I mean - really. What is power?


562 posted on 03/31/2005 11:23:48 AM PST by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 561 | View Replies ]

To: FreedomCalls
The governor is not their boss.

Yes, he is. He is the top law enforcement officer in the State of Florida.

The President did not have any authority to act.

Yes, he did. He is the chief law enforcement officer in the United States of America.

Both had the sworn duty to uphold the clear protections afforded to the lives of innocent citizens by the national and state constitutions.

Those protections are now moot, since our legal and political class have decided to completely ignore them.

They won't even talk about it, just as you and those who argue as you do won't talk about it.

Unalienable rights are now being alienated by our own government. God help us...

575 posted on 03/31/2005 11:33:11 AM PST by EternalVigilance ("I thirst.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 561 | View Replies ]

To: FreedomCalls
That was the "Trail of Tears" law. The Governor of Georgia illegally seized Cherokee land and expelled them to Oklahoma. The Cherokees took it to the Supreme Court and they won. Jackson issued his famous statement and did not interfere in the matter. It is the only time in U.S. history that that has ever happened. Are you saying that it is legal for a state to seize your land and hand it over to someone else? Not at all. Maybe if the second time in U.S. history that it happened (being on the side of life, instead of death, this time), may have atoned for the first time.

No he couldn't have. The police there were municipal police under the control of the mayor. The governor is not their boss.

I believe state law would trump local law. If Gov. Bush had pressed it, it would have happened. He might have been impeached for it (the constitutional recourse in the legislature, if the judiciary pursued it), but the precedent of our govt. starving an innocent to death would not have happened.

He issued his executive order and it was declared "unconstitutional" by the courts. So then, judges ARE the final ultimate power in the U.S. Good to know that. Next time I vote for a local judge, I'll have to realize I'm electing someone more powerful than the Governor, President, and God combined. Because that is the power that Judge Greer gave himself.

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I do appreciate that both Pres. Bush and Gov. Bush did try, and I'm not willing to throw them under the bus. However, there are times when an Executive must look at his oath of office and execute it. I'm not saying it would have been easy, but that's why they call it "doing your duty", instead of a "hobby". The executive branch's power has been whittled away because they are not excercising it. The outcome of this case, and the horrible precedent that it sets, reflects that.

This case is just one example. The people vote in legislators, who pass laws saying that illegal aliens can't derive govt. benefits; judges call them "unconstitutional" and throw them out. Now the courts are trying to keep people freeloading on Tenncare in Tenn., even though the Governor says we can't afford it. Many more examples exist. When the will of the people is continually being thwarted by autocratic Mandarins, eventually there is going to be hell to pay for it. Something had better be done soon, and a strong executive, calling these potentates on their abuse of power, is the only way it's going to happen. Why pass more laws, when the damn judges will just call them "unconstitutional"? It won't work.

This case, when a human life was at stake, would have been a good time for a strong executive to make the point. Now, it's only going to get worse, until eventually the pot will boil over. Either that, or we just admit we live in an oligarchy and are too lame to do anything about it.

622 posted on 03/31/2005 1:38:48 PM PST by badbass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 561 | 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