Authority over every issue not enumerated, or assigned to Congress, is reserved for the individual states.
The proper responses to government officials who are putting us all under house arrest till THEY say otherwise (the “tyrants”) include:
Continue reading “Some things we can do about government mandated house arrest!”
MASSENA, N.Y. — The Rutherford Institute has warned that it will consider filing a First Amendment lawsuit if police continue to threaten a New York church with prosecution and $1000 fines for holding drive-in worship services that adhere to social distancing guidelines. In a legal letter to the Chief of Police for the Town of Massena, NY, Rutherford Institute attorneys point out that while federal and state governments have adopted specific restrictive measures in an effort to decelerate the spread of the COVID-19 virus, the current public health situation has not resulted in the suspension of fundamental constitutional rights such as religious freedom, freedom of speech and the right of assembly.
“They were monsters with human faces, in crisp uniforms, marching in lockstep, so banal you don’t recognize them for what they are until it’s too late.” — Ransom Riggs, Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children
I have never known any government to put the best interests of its people first, and this COVID-19 pandemic is no exception.
Now this isn’t intended to be a debate over whether COVID-19 is a legitimate health crisis or a manufactured threat. Such crises can—and are—manipulated by governments in order to expand their powers. As such, it is possible for the virus to be both a genuine menace to public health and a menace to freedom.
Continue reading “Human Lab Rats: The U.S. Government’s Secret History of Grisly Experiments”
“The things we were worried would happen are happening.”—Angus Johnston, professor at the City University of New York
No one is safe.
No one is immune.
No one gets spared the anguish, fear and heartache of living under the shadow of an authoritarian police state.
Continue reading “The Worst Is Yet to Come: Contact Tracing, Immunity Cards and Mass Testing”
WASHINGTON, DC —In refusing to strike down an overly broad law criminalizing pro-immigration speech, the U.S. Supreme Court has paved the way for the government to punish anyone engaging in so-called “anti-government” speech that encourages resistance to tyranny through civil disobedience. Elevating judicial technicalities and procedure over fundamental rights, the Court unanimously ruled in United States v. Sineneng-Smith that the lower court had overstepped its authority when it, and not the defendant, noticed that the federal statute which makes it a crime to “encourage” undocumented aliens to remain in the country was overbroad in violation of the First Amendment. The Rutherford Institute, in conjunction with the ACLU and the Service Employees International Union, filed an amicus brief in the case arguing that the statute is overbroad and could serve as a model for laws used to punish anyone who urges resistance to government tyranny.
Continue reading “Supreme Court Paves the Way for Government to Punish Anti-Government Speech That Encourages Resistance to Tyranny Through Civil Disobedience”
With the sight of cops in cities around the country resembling totalitarian warriors out of a stereotypical dystopian novel, many Americans have become alarmed at the apparent transition of peace officers to a role as a law enforcing occupation force.
They might even be wondering – “how did this happen?”
Well, it certainly didn’t happen overnight. And, as the old saying goes, follow the money.
“Those who created this country chose freedom. With all of its dangers. And do you know the riskiest part of that choice they made? They actually believed that we could be trusted to make up our own minds in the whirl of differing ideas. That we could be trusted to remain free, even when there were very, very seductive voices—taking advantage of our freedom of speech—who were trying to turn this country into the kind of place where the government could tell you what you can and cannot do.”—Nat Hentoff
We are fast becoming a nation—nay, a world—of book burners.
Continue reading “Technofascism: Digital Book Burning in a Totalitarian Age”
By Publius Huldah
Think NOT that you must have a law degree to understand the Constitution of the United States; or that the lawyers, law professors and black robed judges are the ones who understand it best. They are the ones who perverted it. To restore constitutional government, We the People must learn the basic concepts of “government”; and we must learn the Constitution, elect representatives who will honor their oaths to support it (Art VI, clause 3), and remove from office those who don’t.
Continue reading “BASIC CONCEPTS OF “GOVERNMENT””
A lot of people say we should be respectful of politicians, even if we disagree with their actions. They say we should “respect the office.”’ That certainly isn’t how the American colonists treated British officials who were abusing their power.
In 1767 and 1768, Parliament passed a series of laws known as the Townsend Acts. The acts included the New York Restraining Act, which shut down the colony’s legislative assembly as punishment for its refusal to comply with the Quartering Act. Several of the acts levied taxes, which were not only meant to raise revenue, but more generally to set the precedent that Parliament had the authority to tax the colonies.
In response to the Townshend Acts, Samuel Adams and James Otis wrote what became known as the Massachusetts Circular Letter. The thrust of their argument was that the taxes were unconstitutional because Massachusetts was not represented in Parliament.
Continue reading “Government Officials Who Abuse Their Power Deserve Derision Not Respect”
I’m seeing a lot of cheerleading for U.S. Attorney William Barr because he’s putting the screws on state governors and pressuring them to open up their states. Barr has even threatened to sue states that he determines are infringing on their residents’ rights.
“I am directing each of our United States Attorneys to also be on the lookout for state and local directives that could be violating the constitutional rights and civil liberties of individual citizens,” Barr wrote in a memo.
Never-mind the fact that the federal government was never intended to serve as a liberty enforcement squad and police state governments. Barr’s proposed actions would obliterate the separation of powers inherent in the Constitution and break the Tenth Amendment.
But, “That’s OK!” according to a lot of conservatives and libertarians. “Barr is doing what’s best for liberty! We’ can’t let archaic constitutional scruples get in the way of freedom!”
In other words, we trust William Barr to protect our liberty better than the limits on federal power inherent in the constitutional system.
You might want to pause for a moment and consider just who you’re trusting with all of this power to protect you from petty tyrants in a few state capitols.
A lot of people may not remember that this is Barr’s second go-round as AG. He also served under George H.W. Bush from November 1991 through January 1993.
Continue reading “You’re Trusting This Guy to Protect Your Liberty?”