U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment, Section

AMENDMENT XIV

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Senator Howard Says No To Anchor Babies

 Visit ReJoinOrDie.com and the Patriot Coalition to learn more.

Civil Rights Act of April 9, 1866

The Civil Rights Act- April 9, 1866

An Act to protect all Persons in the United States in their Civil Rights, and furnish the Means of their Vindication.

Be it enacted . . ., That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.

SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That any person who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, shall subject, or cause to be subjected, any inhabitant of any State or Territory to the deprivation of any right secured or protected by this act, or to different punishment, pains, or penalties on account of such person having at any time been held in a condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, or by reason of his color or race, than is prescribed for the punishment of white persons, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be punished by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both, in the discretion of the court.

SEC. 3. And be it further erected, That the district courts of the United States, within their respective districts, shall have, exclusively of the courts of the several States, cognizance of all crimes and offenses committed against the provisions of this act, and also, concurrently with the circuit courts of the United States, of all causes, civil and criminal, affecting persons who are denied or cannot enforce in the courts or judicial tribunals of the State or locality where they may be any of the rights secured to them by the first section of this act.... The jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters hereby conferred on the district and circuit courts of the United States shall be exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United States, so far as such laws are suitable to carry the same into effect; but in all cases where such laws are not adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable remedies and punish offences against law, the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of the cause, civil or criminal, is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern said courts in the trial and disposition of such cause, and, if of a criminal nature, in the infliction of punishment on the party found guilty.

SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That the district attorneys, marshals, and deputy marshals of the United States, the commissioners appointed by the circuit and territorial courts of the United States, with powers of arresting, imprisoning, or bailing offenders against the laws of the United States, the officers and agents of the Freedmen's Bureau, and every other officer who may be specially empowered by the President of the United States, shall be, and they are hereby, specially authorized and required, at the expense of the United States, to institute proceedings against all and every person who shall violate the provisions of this act, and cause him or them to be arrested and imprisoned, or bailed, as the case may be, for trial before such court of the United States or territorial court as by this act has cognizance of the offense. And with a view to affording reasonable protection to all persons in their constitutional rights of equality before the law, without distinction of race or color, or previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, and to the prompt discharge of the duties of this act, it shall be the duty of the circuit courts of the United States and the superior courts of the Territories of the United States, from time to time, to increase the number of commissioners, so as to afford a speedy and convenient means for the arrest and examination of persons charged with a violation of this act . . .
* * * * * * * *

SEC. 8. And be it further enacted, That whenever the President of the United States shall have reason to believe that offenses have been or are likely to be committed against the provisions of this act within any judicial district, it shall be lawful for him, in his discretion, to direct the judge, marshal, and district attorney of such district to attend at such place within the district, and for such time as he may designate, for the purpose of the more speedy arrest and trial of persons charged with a violation of this act; and it shall be the duty of every judge or other officer, when any such requisition shall be received by him, to attend at the place and for the time therein designated.

SEC. 9. And be it further enacted, That it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, or such person as he may empower for that purpose, to employ such part of the land or naval forces of the United States, or of the militia, as shall be necessary to prevent the violation and enforce the due execution of this act.

SEC. IO. And be it further enacted, That upon all questions of law arising in any cause under the provisions of this act a final appeal may be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

 

Restoring Constitutional Governance

UPDATE from Valley Forge: FRIDAY, Aug 13, 2010 (REJOINORDIE REPORT now includes letter to AZ Gov. Brewer, VA Attorney General Cuccinelli and SCOTUS Chief Justice Roberts)

  We the People have a problem. In fact, we have a whole host of problems, not the least of which is our refusal to use the God-given "common sense" we were born with. There are 50 states in the United States, but it wasn't always that way. This country started when 13 colonies declared their independence from a tyrannical monarchy, and then as independent states, enjoined themselves to form a nation with a Divinely-inspired compact, they called the "New Constitution."

Three major cases are winding their way through the federal judiciary right now that shouldn't be there. A lawyer I know counseled me against calling it a "kangaroo court" because he said there is no evidence that a preconceived outcome is afoot. Well, I guess in respect to the individual cases that may be true, but in the bigger scheme of things, they are ALL "kangaroo court proceedings" because in the grander scheme of things, We the People, and the sovereign states that created a federal government have no rule book by which we can expect a fair hearing.

The federal judiciary, with the help of Congress, is making up the rules as they go. In my opinion, the pre-determined outcome is to finish abolishing States' Rights, and to further divide We the People so that we won't put our differences aside and work together for the common good, as the Founders advised.

Case 1: U.S. v. State of Arizona  (SB-1070)

Case 2: U.S. v. State of California  (Defense of Marriage)

Case 3: U.S. v. Commonwealth of Virginia (ObamaCare)

In each of these cases, a U.S. District Court Judge has issued rulings that affect entire states. In each case, the respective legislatures of the sovereign states passed state legislation that their governors in-turn signed into law that affect millions of their citizens, and yet in each case, one inferior court judge, hearing the case before them, has issued injunctions, and passed judgment on a not-so-inferior party in their respective cases.

No offense to the District Court judges, but they are out of their league, and have ZERO jurisdiction to even hear the cases, let alone pass judgment. Why do I say that? Simple, because that is what the U.S. Constitution says.

The Framers of the Constitution recognized that there would be times when a single state might disagree with the federal government, or vise-versa. They also knew that a case involving a whole state was more important than one than involved a single citizen. The citizens of those 13 confederated states eventually signed a contract with each other that included an acknowledgment of the special circumstances that might arise if a "State" was a party in a case where the result might impact the entire Republic, and they did NOT leave it to the lesser or inferior courts to be the "first to hear the case."

No siree, they did not. States which find themselves embroiled in a legal controversy with the federal government get "front-of-the-line" privileges, bypassing all the inferior courts. States get to have their cases heard before the supreme court in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States.

U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2, Clause 2, Part One, reads:

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers, and Consuls, and those in which a State is Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction."

It does not say the Supreme Court "may" have original jurisdiction. It says SHALL.

Legal and political pundits would have you believe that "precedent" and "statutes" have been in place for decades that allow the federal government to sue a state, or vise-versa, and use the U.S. District Court system to act as the court of "original jurisdiction." This practice has been made near perfect for the political animals amongst us, for it affords them the opportunity to gather political capital as the cases proceed through the rat-maze of the appellate process, and it eases the burden on the Supreme Court to actually have to sit through and actually "hear" cases.

Depending on how a case is going, and which way the political winds are blowing, when it reaches the Supreme Court, they have the option, primarily at the discretion of the Chief Justice, as to whether they will even hear the appealed case at all, or simply let the appellate decision stand.

This can be a very handy shell game to play on the ignorant, and rarely is justice served, and rarely is REAL scrutiny applied to the Supreme Court and its occupants.

By the time most cases make it to the Supreme Court through the appellate process, the majority of the public has forgotten about the case altogether, and find themselves saying, "Oh, yeah. I remember that...," when they hear of the Supreme Court's ruling.

Do the elected leaders of a State have the right to marginalize the sovereignty of that State by participating in an un-Constitutional inferior court proceeding on behalf of the State? No, they do not, and yet, over time that has become the norm. We the People, so busy with our pursuits of happiness, haven't even taken the time to read the Constitution and Bill of Rights put in place to protect our liberties and freedoms, and over the centuries, aspiring men and women, playing on our ignorance, have nibbled away at the very sovereignty of the States. And these States, I might add, are supposed to be powerful enough to stand between us and a rogue, out-of-control federal government.

How can a State do that, if they allow themselves to be relegated to an "inferior" status? How can a State expect it will get a fair hearing of its grievances, in a timely manner, such that the inner-workings of that state and its citizenry aren't held hostage for years, waiting for justice to pay them a visit.

Uncle Sam, looking down his nose, is telling Virgina, Arizona, and California, "We'll get to you in our own sweet time. Go play in the inferior courts for a while. Maybe when you appeal to the Supreme Court, we'll try to squeeze you into our busy schedule."

That may not be what the occupants of SCOTUS say, but that is the reality, and it IS OUR FAULT.

We the People must demand that our respective States stand up for their State's Rights when Uncle Sam comes a calling with a complaint against them.

If we find that our State's Attorney General and/or Governor doesn't have the backbone to stand up for a State's Right against the federal government, then we must replace them. An oath to uphold the Constitution is no small commitment, and we must stop letting our elected and appointed officials "fudge" on that commitment.

Are we "united" States when foreign governments are allowed to enter briefs in a lowly and inferior district court case brought by our own government against a sovereign state. It is obvious that Arizona is fighting for its life. Who in the federal government sees Arizona as more than simply a group of sheep, being led to a collective slaughter?

Why is Governor Brewer even participating in this charade? Why is Virginia Attorney General Cuccinelli particpating in his suit against Obamacare in an inferior court?

Does not A.G. Cuccinelli represent an entire State? Has he read the Constitution? And what about California? Should they allow an inferior court judge to tell them their constitution is un-constitutional? Wake up People! We must restore Constitutional governance at all levels of government, or it won't be long before the Constitution is just a "piece of paper."

I have written Arizona Governor Brewer and Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts regarding this dangerous and ongoing usurpation of the Constitution.

Open Letters to Governor Brewer, Attorney General Cuccinelli, and Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts

RESTORE CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE

RE-JOIN OR DIE!