Use Article 3!
Bridle the Courts

Can Congress, and state legislatures, re-capture their legislative authority?

Why is this important?

  1. Courts, not legislatures, have corrupted our nation's character.

  2. Courts have assumed dictatorial power over Congress, the President, and States.

  3. OPINIONS of unelected judges override LAWS made by legislatures which timidly ceded power to the Courts.

  4. Judges claim judicial supremacy over every action and word in government and in our private lives.

  5. Justice delayed is justice denied; but courts are jammed and major issues take years to resolve.

  6. The least accountable branch asserts its OPINIONS, dominates policymaking in America (despite no policymaking authority in the constitution), and bullies the administration to enforce its opinions (courts have no innate enforcement ability).

The Solution is Simple.

Congress has evaded its responsibility to govern courts, allowing courts to arrogate power unto themselves.

Contrary to popular belief the supreme Court is NOT a co-equal branch of government. That propaganda was contrived and perpetrated by media, and in schools, by lawyers and judges. Read the Constitution. The Court is supposed to serve under control of our elected representatives. Instead, judges claim final approval (judicial review) over every action and word in government and in our private lives. Court opinions are NOT the "Law of the Land" at all. Only legislatures can make laws. A supreme Court decision is a ruling that is binding only on the parties involved in the case, and enforceable only if the executive and legislative branches choose to enforce it.

Article 3 of the Constitution mandates that Congress establish the parameters under which a supreme Court will function. Constitutional framer James Madison's Federalist Papers make it very clear the branches are to be separate and distinct. Nowhere does he or anyone else say equal.

Generally, state constitutions, like Florida's, allow only one exception to the separation principle  The Attorney General is allowed to serve in the Executive branch as well as the Judicial Branch - lawyers are officers of the court and not allowed to simultaneously serve as Legislators or Executive officers (but Judges fail to enforce that concept).

Sec 1: The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. ...

Sec 2: ...the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Congress evaded it's responsibility to govern the courts, allowing renegade courts to arrogate (seize with false pretention) power unto themselves. The United States is now governed by an oligarchy of black-robe judges that arrogantly dictate what the law is, as they twist and mangle the law and legislative intent to fit their own agenda. Sometimes Congress allows this to happen because unaccountable courts will "take the heat" when Congress doesn't want to.

Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes egotistically declared "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the Court says it is." Most law schools would back him up. Did you know that one does not have to be a lawyer to be a judge? In fact, most judges in the Founders time were ORDAINED clergy. Today, lawyers are trained to follow myths and rules that have no basis in law. An example is lifetime appointment - the Constitution specifically says "during good behavior".. Several justices have been booted for cussing in court, drunkenness, and ignoring an act of Congress. But that is no longer enforced.

There is no provision in the Constitution authorizing courts to INTERPRET laws. They are supposed to APPLY laws to the facts of a particular case.

The Constitution was designed to protect citizens from overbearing government. But we lost our constitutional republic. Legislatures have timidly given up their constitutional authority to a bevy of power-hungry lawyers determined to surreptitiously transform American society into one that neither recognizes nor follows the founding principles that propelled us to fundamental honesty, unprecedented freedom, prosperity, and world dominance. Instead, some courts cite contrary laws in other countries.

Using Article 3 Congress could place Clarence Thomas at a card table in the basement of the Capitol building (where the court used to meet before they erected their "temple" at 1 First St in D.C.). Under such an arrangement Americans would get far more freedom and justice than with the cabal that now dominates American society.


Original Supreme Court in Basement

By way of compromise, here is a simpler solution that will stop the tyranny of imperious judges who openly live for an opportunity to "make law" that is clearly NOT their job."

1. Require judges decisions to follow ORIGINAL INTENT. Eliminate Case Law (precedent that bases decisions on what prior courts have said a/k/a Stare Decisis).  Hold people accountable under the law as originally written. Stacking precedents one upon the other takes us far from the law as written, and is like stacking law books - each error destabilizes the stack until it collapses.

2. Restrict judges from INTERPRETING the law. As originally done, just APPLY the written law to the case at hand. According to a reliable established principle, laws that require interpretation are Void for Vagueness. When vague, the legislature needs to go back to work and be more specific.

3. Require judges to disclose, and recuse when conflicts of interest arise.

Laws get passed following weeks, sometimes months, of debate about the pros, cons, and nuances. This documents the legislative intent, and all sides thoroughly discuss and modify the proposal. Then you see the true will of the people through their elected representatives. Earliest (closest to enactment) court decisions used to enjoy more weight, now it is the later ones that dominate, accelerating us into chaos. Later decisions are increasingly subject to corruption as judges pick precedents they personally like. If a law needs changing, go thru the essential debate and legislative process protections.

By contrast, the supreme Court hears only ONE hour of presentation by each side! Then they pontificate from their ivory tower debating society, decreeing how the rest of us must act and think.

Congress must invoke it's Article 3 responsibilities and force all courts to FOLLOW THE LAW, not wander among corrupt warped precedents where judges pick and choose among which precedents they want to follow, and encourage cunning lawyers to carve out little nuances to benefit their client.

If you ever filed a lawsuit or defense, you discover that more than 75% of lawyers fees go to researching conflicting precedents instead of researching the law. This is an unconscionable inflation of tasks that unfairly benefits the burgeoning legal system and jacks up fees. It is a prime driver of out-of-control medical costs, liability insurance, and goods and services passed on to consumers in higher prices.

I am a computer systems analyst. We look for opportunities to improve processes. After we define a problem, we strive to fix the SOURCE, not the symptoms. A second major source of American decline is out-of-control courts legislating from the bench, and overturning the legislated will of the people by INTERPRETING (twisting) plain and obvious laws.  Among the most important guarantees of liberty is the criminal doctrine called Void for Vagueness. People are entitled to unequivocally know what the law requires. That doctrine needs to be applied to all court decisions.

Judges also arrogated an essential power reserved to juries since the 1215 Magna Carta as a cornerstone of freedom. JURY NULLIFICATION of unjust laws (declaring the king's law void) is routinely superseded by today's judges charging (giving instructions to) the jury and demanding they follow his interpretation of the law saying "I'll tell you what the law is, and you must follow it in your decision". Nullification was designed to give the PEOPLE, not judges or the king, ultimate authority over the laws.

There are numerous examples of judicial activism that directly contravene Original Intent and written law:

  • Free Speech Zones (all of America is a free speech zone)
  • Numerous restrictions on religious freedom
  • Freedom OF religion twisted into freedom FROM religion
  • Forcing God out of schools, creating education decline and crime increases
  • Infringed gun rights
  • Abortion
  • Forced funding of abortion & contraception
  • Immigration chaos
  • Invasion by illegal aliens
  • Sanctuary Cities
  • So-called "mercy" killing
  • Ambiguous sexual identity continuums vs binary sexuality
  • Government-compelled purchases like ObamaCare
  • Private property confiscation to benefit business
  • Spying on citizens
  • Final arbiter (Plessy v Ferguson)
  • Courts superior to Congress and President (Brown v Board of Education)
  • Judicial Review of other branches (Marbury v Madison)

Still more judicial activism and corruption create legal tyranny

  • Regulatory overreach
  • Self-declared secrecy from public
  • Judicial Privilege
  • Unchallenged conflicts of interest
  • The Administrative State
  • One judge's mere opinions trump enacted law.
  • Political corruption allowing connected elites who know the judge to escape accountability
  • There is no longer equal justice, nor application, under the law.
  • Congress breaking their own laws
  • Disrespect for the law and government
  • Welfare dependence
  • Court-enforced Secularization
  • Enforcing discredited Darwinism in schools
  • More rights for criminals than victims
  • Rights of freeloaders supersede property owner
  • Freezing out self-representation (pro se)
  • Skyrocketed health care and insurance cost due to excessive lawsuits begetting defensive medicine
  • Higher costs of goods and services due to product liability lawsuits.
  • Allowing nuisance / frivolous claims
  • Encouraging Abuse of Process
  • Decreased family cohesion
  • Chaos in adoptions
  • Racial tensions
  • Foreign Aid
  • Judge threatens 6 months in jail for anyone mentioning Jesus in a SantaFe ISD graduation prayer.
  • Creation of protected classes versus "E Pluribus Unum"

Supreme Court nominee Judge Robert Bork was the most ardent and articulate modern advocate for Original Intent. Here is a PBS interview so you can see his inescapably sound and clear logic for yourself. Here is a debate where Original Intent vs Precedent is explored. Justice Antonin Scalia's Philosophy of an Originalist, Clarence Thomas Original Meanings. Mark Levin, author of Liberty and Tyranny speaks on Original Intent. Historian David Barton proves the Founders' intended role for the American judicial system with copious footnotes to original documents.

When advocates for an extreme position can't get elected representatives to agree with them, they shop for "A Federal Judge"  (notice that names are rarely used - it avoids accountability) that will agree with their discredited position. Then they typically file suit in the 9th Circuit to overturn the legislated will of the people. Congress can no longer shirk responsibility for a court system run amok.  The 9th Circuit on the left coast is so belligerent against the law, it is commonly referred to as the 9th CIRCUS. Only 20% of their decisions are affirmed. The conspirators eventually get overturned by the supreme Court, but only after millions of dollars and precious time get wasted correcting their malfeasance in pursuit of re-crafting the Constitution.

 

Seek
TRUTH

Liberalism

Repudiate Debt

Bail-in

Common Core


School Choice

Federalist


Rich People

Oaths

Language of God

Star of Behtlehem


Colloidal Silver




321-480-5514
or Skype
9AM to 10PM

The time is NOW

During the 2019/2020 session of Congress, Democrats vowed to block legislation proposed by the President and the Senate, so not much will get done. This do-nothing hiatus is the best time to create a groundswell of support for reform. In addition, it is highly likely we will be subjected to attempts by one federal judge or another to block President Trump's execution of his duty to protect the country's southern border. When the voters and their representatives get subjected to the deafening tyranny soon to ensue over the Wall, implement this comprehensive solution to stop the madness. Meet voters frustration and growing disgust that government is untrustworthy and irrelevant with a solution that addresses the core problem - renegade courts. The time to strike a blow for freedom is NOW. If we make our case, people will recognize courts as the enemy and increasingly endorse this solution.

Burdened by scofflaw liberals declaring sanctuary states and cities,  Americans are faced with issues critical to our survival as millions of aliens are disrupting our electoral process, and tens of thousands more are recruited to storm our borders mixed with drug runners, human traffickers, criminals and terrorists intent on doing harm. Disrupters are enabled by reckless judges who oppose President Trump's efforts to execute his most sacred duty to ensure safety and security by securing our borders.

We implore President Trump to look at the picture of Andrew Jackson on his office wall and follow Jackson's solution. Justice John Marshall issued an opinion when Andrew Jackson was president and Jackson said "That's your opinion, let's see if you can enforce it." Judges decisions are not equivalent to the Constitution, they are just an opinion. Furthermore, Courts have no enforcement power because Federal Marshalls are lent to them by the President under his Justice Department. We will have no country left if we wait years for the Supreme Court to take up appeals while tens of thousands of impoverished aliens, sown with elements of MS-13 and mid-east terrorists, flood our communities.

Courts want us to believe they are the defenders of minority rights, but Congress (the branch closest to the people) deserves the credit. In 1857 Lincoln refused to obey the Court after the Dred Scott decision when the court ruled Congress could not end slavery. In 1875 Congress banned segregation, but in 1882 the court said they could not do it. Courts were, and are, the problem.

Three out of four Americans intuitively believe courts have gone too far, and Americans are right. It is time for Congress and the state legislatures to take back their authority and bridle courts.

YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE! In this republic, it is our DUTY to speak against what is wrong. We the People hire judges under OUR authority. they are accountable to US, not the other way around. People (even lawyers) no longer believe it is necessary to read or follow the Constitution because judges have set themselves as the final authority and usurped the Constitution. Pat Robertson recalled that his Yale Law Schooling started not with the Constitution, but with Marbury as their foundation. Will you join with me to rescue our country from the clutches of renegade courts? Distribute this article link to everyone who engages in politics or philosophy, and ask your Congressional Representative to courageously propose legislation to bridle the courts. The courts will fight back, but the Constitution is clearly on our side.

Cocoa Beach area RealtorRichard Webb
 
321-480-5514
eMail Richard
Meet Richard Webb

URL: http://4Brevard.com/Article3.shtml  
Jan 16, 2019 et seq Last Modified