Showing posts with label judicial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label judicial. Show all posts

Monday, January 31, 2011

Huzzah! District Court Rules Obamacare Unconstitutional

The powder keg has been lit. This is the moment we've all been waiting for. For in this moment we watch as the US truly decides its fate. Do we emulate the past failed societies? Mimic the currently failing ones? Or does the great experiment which began under the banner of 'Don't Tread on Me' have the strength to rise once again and roar with the fury of a lion into the darkness that 'We will not subjugate ourselves now, nor never bow to tyranny'.

A district court judge in Florida ruled that the Obamacare law violates the commerce clause in the Constitution. Read the story from Fox News. He stated that the individual mandate was inseparable from the entire law itself, and as such the entire law must be stricken down. He did give Congress the flexibility to try again, stating reasons of economic impact, but the victory today comes from the individual mandate.

No doubt the brief has already been filed by Obama's Lawyers to challenge the ruling in the SCOTUS... wasting more taxpayers China's money instead of accepting and moving forward. I will be watching this evolution with great interest, as should we all. We should flood the White House call center with messages for Obama to not challenge this in the SCOTUS. We should rise up and demand that our newly elected Congress act now to draft a piece of legislation that ensures interstate availability, addresses tort law, and addresses the size and structure of insurance companies (and necessities for them - seriously, do away with them). Top it off with a clause that NO earmarks may be added, that the entire bill MUST be read publicly to the people, and that no free citizen shall ever be forced by their government to purchase a private good or service... put it down in black and white. Send THAT to the Senate and White House.

We live in a land that was born of tyranny, broke free in adolescence, and has slowly allowed the cancer of tyranny to infect the body of the nation as we mature. Today, and every day, we must remind ourselves that we are free men. We must demand liberty from our government. We must live freedom in our lives. It must beat loudly in our hearts for all the world to see and hear... so that all people of all time will look upon this great experiment as God's true gift to the world... freedom. Natural, Just, and Unbridled freedom.

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Federal Court to WA State - "Imprisoned Felons have a RIGHT to Vote"

Just when you think that the Federal Government has gone too far, the Judicial Branch jumps into the spotlight with a whopper of a violation of state's rights. From the Associated Press:

OLYMPIA, Wash. —
A federal appeals court has ruled that imprisoned felons should be allowed to vote in Washington to ensure that racial minorities are protected under the Voting Rights Act.

Tuesday's 2-1 ruling by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the 2000 ruling of a district judge in Spokane. That judge had ruled that state law did not violate the act, and dismissed a lawsuit filed by a former prison inmate from Bellevue.

The two appellate judges ruled that disparities in the state's justice system "cannot be explained in race-neutral ways."

A spokeswoman says state Attorney General Rob McKenna is weighing the state's next step.
The protection of racial minorities is of more importance than the sanctity of elections, according to the 9th Circuit Clowns. Such a ruling is as intrusive into State's Rights as it is insane. An individual should not be barred from voting based on gender or skin tone, but there are multitudes of legal and justifiable reasons why free citizens would want to bar the most violent criminal minds from helping shape our society!

At this point, I need someone to remind me why we are not immediately instituting a policy of 'tar and feather' - and I am not referring to the felons!

As a devoted 10th amendment supporter, there is nothing that makes my skin crawl more than federal "leaders" meddling in state affairs - UNLESS it is the feds meddling in state ELECTIONS.

Friday, January 4, 2008

Bill Clinton in the Supreme Court?

Thanks to my father for the news tip!

CNN has picked up a largely ignored story, and is apparently letting the blogging world discuss this issue...

According to the CNN Report, Hillary Clinton is planning to appoint Bill Clinton to the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court.

Of course, there are many issues that would likely restrict Clinton's appointment, unless the congress were overwhelmingly Democratic after the 2008 races, which include:

  • Perjury before the Congress by Clinton
  • His being disbarred
  • Precedent for Husband/Wife to serve on Executive and Judicial branch of Federal Government at the same time (Taft served as a Justice after being president, but not during the term of a spouse, of course)

One further issue with this idea is the ensuring that the establishment of the Clinton Dynasty lives on in US politics. A move, which as of last night, could prove fatal for the Clinton campaign.

What are your thoughts on this issue: Supreme Court Justice William J. Clinton... ??? ...