Indiana Supreme Court Eviscerates U.S. Constitution

Right Wing News ^ | 5/16/11 | Warner Todd Huston

[Nachum]

Mitch Daniels anyone?

[Da Coyote]

“... It is proof that these “judges” have no fear of the people....”

That will not always be true.

[NWFLConservative]

Any court which does not uphold the Constitution of the United States must be considered irreconcilably corrupt and disbanded and all Court Justices jailed and tried for crimes against the Constitution.

[theDentist]

What? You think a RINO is going to help?

[rawhide]

Actually Daniels appointed the judge who wrote the decision to allow this.

[saganite]

Well hell, the US Supreme Court just threw the 4th amendment out the window. Who cares what the Indiana Court did. We now live in a police state.

[Nachum]

Not exactly. Maybe it was a RINO that put these fools on the court to begin with.

[exDemMom]

Where a state tries to ignore the Constitution, isn’t that an issue for the Supreme court?

[browniexyz]

Mitch Daniels = Stealth Sharia

[95B30]

They need to be reminded what happened to King George III in 1776!

[OneWingedShark]

Constitution of the United States; Article. VI.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
 
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 the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
 
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, 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; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

---

US CODE, TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 13, § 241 — Conspiracy against rights
 
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
 
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
 
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

---

I think there's enough to take their State Supreme Court to the cleaners; and if, because of their overbroad ruling, someone dies or is unlawfully arrested (that is, kidnapped), or is threatened with force (as in SWAT team) then we should hand them the death penalty. Such it is written in the law, so should it be done.

[TribalPrincess2U]

I can’t seem to find a site for MD.

Anyone know how to get in touch?

I have a few words...

[freedomwarrior998]

There sure are some stupid people rambling on these blogs. This is proof positive that the internet is actually making people dumber, and actually establishes why people without formal training in the law shouldn't give legal advice.

Nothing in the opinion gives law enforcement the right to enter your home without a warrant, or to use evidence obtained from an illegal search against you. Nor does the decision prevent any officer who engages in such conduct from being charged criminally or sued civilly.

The "sovereign citizens" who are screaming bloody murder about this should go back to tilting at windmills about the eviiiiiillllllllll corporate conspiracy and the UCC.

BTW, this is about the 10th thread on this topic that has been started in the past few days.

[Nachum]

http://www.in.gov/gov/2631.htm

[TribalPrincess2U]

Thx

[TribalPrincess2U]

So what?

We can read, investigate and find out what is really going on.

Is that a problem?

[saganite]

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0516/Supreme-Court-No-warrant-needed-if-police-discern-destruction-of-evidence

[Ken H]

Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

Did the author get that right?

______________________________________

"We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David said.

Do you think the above is consistent with the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment?

[Georgia Girl 2]

So, Mitch you appointed this clown. What are you going to do about it?

[Girlene]

Nothing in the opinion gives law enforcement the right to enter your home without a warrant

From the opinion itself:

"Now this court is faced for the first time with the question of whether Indiana should recognize the common-law right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers. We conclude that public policy disfavors any such rights."

BTW, this is about the 10th thread on this topic that has been started in the past few days.

Could it be because the fourth amendment is important?