- you are not serious in the OJ case they nullified the law - the jury has the power to tell the Attorneys and the Judge we reject all your presentations and citing of the law and we FIND this . . .
Article 3 - The Judicial Branch
Section 2 - Trial by Jury, Original Jurisdiction, Jury Trials(The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.) (This section in parentheses is modified by the 11th Amendment.)In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellateJurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.And there is not one thing the Judge or either attorney can do about it it is done and now settled by the JURY . . . .
- Permalink Reply by on
- You mixed apples with oranges to make your point. You said 70% of the IRS cases and then throw out a SCOTUS decision as to Original Jurisdiction. Not fair, you dog!!!!LOL
- Permalink Reply by on
- Old guys do not play fair and you know that - some of us old dogs have NEW TEETH? BITE DOWN HARD ON THE USURPERS LEG OR NECK WHICH EVER SEEM MOST APPROPRIATED. he he he heYes and the JURY tells the IRS and Judge go pound sand; as we find the law is wrong -
- Permalink Reply by on
- Starting a new reply button for the 14th amendment discussion -You all need to go do some serious searching out for yourselves the full impact of the court domination of States rights based on this amendment. The bill of rights was not ever intended to be placed on the states - that was a option left open for the States to decide for them selves - the 14th now makes it mandatory and the courts even used it to order busing children for hours each day to force racial balance in ALL schools no matter the cost or inconvenience to the parents. [soveriegn rights of the individual that selected the house and school they desired for their children].There are worse example for many other usurping actions by Congress and the courts.Read and give some real feed back not opinions how about some quotes and cases?
- Permalink Reply by on
- Intention, contention, retention, attention, it's all just words...we are where we are!!! I'm a pragmatist, I told you in a PM how this issue has been an evolving one for me, I was like Nathan 3 years ago. Now, I have reconciled to the fact that this is the law and the only way around it is to change it, I don't know what else to say.@Nathan,What I meant by working together is that we need to be united on the one issue, at least, that this is the law as it is interpreted today. I know we can work together, but we need to prove to others that the fight is a futile one, and they must abandon their position or lose and weaken our position in the doing. Nothing will happen if we don't prove to the American public that the wording of the 14th allows for an anchor baby to become president. You read the opinion from the Congressional Review Board, they've adopted this position. My dream of a new 14th would include specific language once and for all as to who is a Natural Born.Atlas, said it best...It's too broke to fix!!!!
- Permalink Reply by on
- My exact point about ten years ago - revoke it and the anchor baby issue is the worse result of the damn amendment -
- Permalink Reply by on
- There could be a lot of truth to what you say, I certainly don't disagree with your statements.Call it what you want, but my bet is if you explain to the public that an anchor baby can become POTUS, they'll be on our side. I have a lot of confidence in the voting public. (the public at large can be idiotic and fickle) Voters are the 50% or so that we have to convince.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Nathan then frame the argument to change the 14th amendment by the congress and the States using the article V amendment process. the folks that argue about the current law can not win for NO ONE in the Government or the Courts will buy the concept period end of story.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Lock,
First we have to have an argument to make. The man in the street will say 'You want to change 14A, but why?' What is the argument and what line of logic is it founded upon?
- Permalink Reply by on
- The argument will not hunt - the average person will say did you see dancing with the stars they had that song on > . . . . .The violation of the States rights and powers by the Courts and the Congress telling the States how to run their schools, order busing, how to use the land within the States, how to use the water, how to limit farming, how to hire government employees, how to enforce the bill of rights which the Founders/Framers/Ratifiers did not force upon the STATES. They made it left open for the States to decide what issues they needed.IT IS ALL ABOUT STATES RIGHTS NOT CITIZENSHIP - let us join to end it for the rights reasons - as in States.
- Permalink Reply by on
- IT IS ALL ABOUT STATES RIGHTS NOT CITIZENSHIP -
Man in street asks 'How does 14A violate States Rights?
- Permalink Reply by on
- Nathan - Good point in regard to the man in the street. When I first came to TPP I saw a discussion to Repeal the 17thA. My first thought was -These crazies want to change the Constitution? No way!Well I went to the discussion, lots of complicted reasons being given etc. I became convinced -BUT - I also stayed with it even when my eyes were glazed over. Most wont do that in America. Then the detailed argument started to get condensed down to a concise, common sense reason. thats when it gelled.So - These discussions need to get over the hump and make sense to the common citizen, much as I believe the Founders attempted in constucting the Constitution in the first place. The 14, 16, 17thA got passed because the People bought into a simple, albeit false, argument for passage.I believe it is the same way they get repealed, except we use the truth, logic and common sense. If the man in the street wants liberty and freedom, they will be repealed.@Lock - Article V convnetion question. I would be most comfortable with it if there is a way to do it, specifying the three constitutional harpies (14,16,17).
No comments:
Post a Comment