Posts

Linder Letter: The Right to be Left Alone

/1 Comment/in , /by
Photo Credit: Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Photo Credit: Sean Gallup/Getty Images

The makers of our Constitution…conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone — the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.” ~ Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Dissenting, Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).

It has been reported that the National Security Agency intercepts packages with electronics being shipped by UPS and FEDEX and infects them with computer bugs for future access. Both UPS and FEDEX chose not to deny the charge. This is the same agency that captures and catalogues five billion phone calls each day as well as all of our email communications.

Richard Higbie, a former criminal investigator for the State Department turned whistleblower, had his computer hacked and four years worth of messages were removed and permanently deleted. Some of the “lost” emails detailed his complaint against the government. Others were privileged communications with his attorney who also experienced a break-in in his office in which three computers were stolen.

“Fox News” reporter James Rosen’s reporting on North Korea led authorities to believe that he had a good source in the government. To track down the suspected leaker Attorney General Eric Holder lied in an affidavit before a judge to get approval to tap Rosen’s phones. His parent’s phones were also tapped.

Sharyl Attkisson is a “CBS” reporter who was covering the ATF gunrunning operation known as Fast and Furious. She also reported on Benghazi. Her work computer and her personal computers mysteriously turned on in the middle of the night. Nothing was taken from her personal information, but work product from her business computer was taken and the tracks were professionally covered.

Read more from this story HERE.

Krauthammer: Obama has Taken a ‘Very Cavalier Attitude’ Towards U.S. Constitution (+video)

/15 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: Mr. T in DCConservative political pundit Charles Krauthammer hammered President Barack Obama on Friday, saying he has taken a “very cavalier attitude” towards the United States Constitution and rule of law.

“I’m talking about how the administration, particularly the president, seems to think that he has right to change duly passed statutes on his own, or to suspend whole parts of laws on his own,” Krauthammer told Fox News’ Harris Faulkner. ”I mean, the constitution is pretty clear, the president executes the law and the Congress passes the laws.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Will the Supreme Court Rule That Treaties Override the Constitution?

/2 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: TerrellAfterMath.comIn 2012, National Federation of Independent Business vs Sebelius was considered by many to be one of the most significant Supreme Court cases heard in decades. On its outcome would depend the continued liberty of the American people. For if our elected officials can force the public to purchase government-approved health insurance, what can they NOT demand the American people acquire?! The full effects of the unconscionable betrayal of the Constitution and the American public by Chief Justice John Roberts are only beginning to be realized.

If the NFIB decision pronounced an end to our liberty, the Court’s upcoming ruling in Bond vs U.S. has the potential to literally end the 240 year history of the United States. For at issue in this case is the following question: When the United States joins an international treaty, may Congress pass laws toward its implementation that violate the Constitution? The Obama Regime, through Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, says YES. For during oral arguments on November 5th, Verrilli told the Court that “…once a treaty is signed by the president and ratified by the Senate, Congress has the power to pass any law necessary and proper to implement the treaty.” ANY law! The constitutional limits on Congressional power may be ignored at the whim of lawmakers.

As a result, the United Nations would effectively make the laws by which the American people are governed. The UN Small Arms Treaty would, for example, wipe out the 2nd Amendment as international police acquire authority to order–even carry out–the disarming of the American people.

Read more from this story HERE.

Obama the Constitutional Hero

/3 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: National Review

Photo Credit: National Review

President Obama surprised many (including the U.S. military, apparently) with his decision to emulate his predecessor by seeking congressional authorization to attack a Baathist regime in the Middle East.

The media’s reaction, while predictable, has bordered on parody, lending weight to conservative suspicions about the press corps’ particular devotion to the current president. “Quite extraordinary: after 30 years of presidents strengthening powers of exec branch, POTUS is giving some of that power back to Congress,” NBC’s Chuck Todd gushed on Twitter.

Numerous outlets echoed this theme of Obama as restorer of the Constitution. BuzzFeed wrote of Obama’s “big Syria power giveaway.” The Hill reported that the decision to seek congressional approval “breaks from precedent” and “represented a departure from the policies of several predecessors,” while somewhat awkwardly noting that George W. Bush sought (and won, overwhelmingly) authorization for the Iraq War and the invasion of Afghanistan — as Bush’s father did before the First Gulf War.

Yahoo! News columnist Walter Shapiro praised Obama’s “history-defying decision,” saying it “may well be the most important presidential act on the Constitution and war-making powers since Harry Truman decided to sidestep Congress and not seek its backing to launch the Korean war.” He neglected to mention the recent examples undermining that fearsome trend, other than to denounce the younger Bush’s “hyperbolic . . . claims about Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Judge Allows International Law to Trump US Constitution’s First Amendment Right to Criticize Homosexuality

/14 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: WND

Photo Credit: WND

An anti-gay pastor takes on Uganda and Russia

By Alexis Okeowo.

On Wednesday, Ugandan L.G.B.T. activists heard news that was exciting even though they had assumed it was inevitable: U.S. District Court Judge Michael Ponsor said that a lawsuit brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) against the anti-gay American pastor Scott Lively over his involvement in the effort to persecute gay people in Uganda can move forward. (Ponsor ruled against Lively’s motion to dismiss the suit.) The activists launched the case last year after months of collecting evidence of Lively’s anti-gay teachings over several of his trips to Uganda since 2002, and of his influence on the conception of the country’s “Kill the Gays” bill.

SMUG is being represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights, of New York, and the suit is based on the Alien Tort Statute, which allows foreigners to file civil lawsuits against Americans for violations of international law. I spent much of last year with Frank Mugisha, who leads SMUG, and wrote about him for the magazine in December. “We want to name and shame the people spreading homophobia here,” Mugisha told me.

Read more from this story HERE.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Judge: foreigners can sue U.S. pastor over sermons

By Bob Unruh.

[T]he ruling from Judge Michael Posner in a case brought by Sexual Minorities Uganda against Pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries could … establish that an international consensus disavowing long-held biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution.

SMUG alleges Lively must be punished for criticizing homosexuality, calling his speech a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law”…

[Lively’s attorney said:] “We are disappointed with the decision because we believe SMUG’s claims are firmly foreclosed, not only by the First Amendment right to free speech, but also by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kiobel, which eliminated Alien Tort Statute claims for events that allegedly occurred in foreign nations”…

The judge took nearly 80 pages to say that he thought the allegations by SMUG were substantive and needed to be adjudicated.

He sided with the “gays” in his first paragraph, explaining that while SMUG is made up of groups “that advocate for the fair and equal treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people,” Lively is an “American citizen residing in Springfield, Mass., who, according to the complaint, holds himself out to be an expert on what he terms the ‘gay movement.’”

Read more from this story HERE.

Cops Violate Student’s Constitutional Rights at Roadblock, Video Goes Viral

/26 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: Highway Patrol ImagesA video affiliated with the Libertarian Party that involved Rutherford County Sheriff’s Deputy A.J. Ross went viral yesterday on social media sites.

“We’ve gotten worldwide response for this,” said Axl David, communications director for the Libertarian Party of Tennessee, a political party that encourages minimum government limited to following the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The video depicted a verbal altercation between Chris Kalbaugh, a 21-year-old junior at Middle Tennessee State University, and Ross at a DUI checkpoint Thursday night…

When Kalbaugh continued to challenge Ross’ demands on the basis of “constitutional rights,” Ross ordered him to pull his car over and step out of the vehicle.

“I broke no laws, and I made sure to be respectful the entire time while still exercising my constitutional freedom,” Kalbaugh said. “The officers would not let me leave, but they would not answer if I was being detained.”

Read more from this story HERE.

School Cuts Off Class Valedictorian’s Mic When He Starts Talking About Constitution (+video)

/32 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: Fox News

A North Texas high school silenced its Valedictorian’s microphone during his speech, prompting questions over his free speech rights.

Students attending the Joshua High School graduation say Remington Reimer’s microphone was cut off, right when he began to talk about the Constitution.

“He just said, he was talking about getting constitutional rights getting taken away from him,” Colin Radford, a Joshua H.S. graduate, said. “And then he said, just yesterday they threatened to turn my microphone off, and then his microphone went off.”

Reimer, who was accepted into the Naval Academy, had his speech pre-approved by the school district.

Read more from this story HERE.

US Constitution Under Sustained Assault in Wake of Boston Marathon Bombings (+video)

/15 Comments/in , /by

Since the horrific Boston Marathon bombings last week, the United States Constitution seems to have taken more criticism than Islamic jihadists. Instead of questioning why two Islamic terrorists would choose to wreak their armed havoc in a state with near-record low gun ownership and some of the nation’s strictest gun control laws, many of our so-called leaders are calling for us to abandon the Constitution.

Take New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, for example. Yesterday, he called on the nation to change its laws and “interpretation” of the Constitution so that we can prevent the type of attacks experienced in Boston:

[W]e live in a complex world where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.

This frightening reaction isn’t only restricted to Bloomberg. Increasingly, members of the GOP have asserted that the Constitution shouldn’t apply to the bombing suspect who was captured alive. Both John McCain and Lindsey Graham have argued that the bomber – a US citizen – should be treated as an enemy combatant. In other words, the Bill of Rights should not apply.

Most Americans have also heard that, even though the Obama Administration has decided to try the alleged bomber in a civilian court, that he has not been Mirandized or afforded access to an attorney given the special circumstances of the case.

Now, no one in his or her right mind would dare have any sympathy for the alleged bomber given what happened in Boston. He should be subjected to a vigorous prosecution and, if found guilty, be executed for his horrendous crimes.

But the fact that the federal government seems to now think it can, based upon its own unilateral classification, strip away all constitutional protections afforded to US citizens for the last 220-plus years should disturb any person concerned with liberty.

This isn’t the first time that critics of increasing federal power have raised the alarm. Just last month, Senator Rand Paul filibustered President Obama’s proposed CIA nominee over the Administration’s suggestion that the president has the authority to kill US citizens in America with armed drones. Given this thermal image of the bombing suspect from a police drone, it doesn’t seem that that day may be too far off:

Also alarming is how multiple federal and state agencies handled the search for the 19 year-old bombing suspect. The following videos show police demanding entry to residences in Massachusetts, presumably without warrants, forcing residents to exit their homes, and taking other actions that one would typically only see in a police state:

Here’s additional footage taken by another Watertown resident:

Terrorism is undeniably a major threat to the United States. But the rush of many within our ruling class to jettison our fundamental rights in exchange for a little perceived security poses a far greater threat to our future.

___________________________________________

“Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.” General John Stark, 1809 (Revolutionary War hero, origin of New Hampshire’s state motto).

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Benjamin Franklin, 1775

'Compromise' on Gun Rights Inevitably Surrenders Constitutional High Ground

/2 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: © Oleg Volk

Much ink (or perhaps many electrons) has been spilled since Sunday, in the wake of an announcement by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) that the gun rights group will support the Senate “gun control” bill, S. 649, as amended by Senators Manchin (D-WV) and Toomey (R-PA), with S. Amendment 715. As National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea reports, a great many gun rights advocates are outraged by what they see as either an enormous tactical blunder, or worse, an outright betrayal on the part of CCRKBA.

Taking a very quick and cursory look at some of the “tactical” objections, many point out that what is perhaps the “flagship” provision of S. Amd. 715, the 15-year prison sentence for officials who attempt to abuse S. 649’s record keeping requirements in order to build a national gun registry, depends on the Department of “Justice” prosecuting itself for wrongdoing. Has “Project Gunwalker” already been forgotten?

Prominent and highly regarded Second Amendment scholar and attorney Dave Kopel argues compellingly that many of the “pro-gun” provisions of Amd. 715 (presumably due to Sen. Manchin’s inexperience with drafting this kind of legislation) would in effect be actually strongly anti-gun. And again, this does not scratch the surface of the “tactical” objections to this “compromise.”

The more fiery critics do not believe CCRKBA chairman Alan Gottlieb has miscalculated, but has instead deliberately stabbed gun rights advocates in the back. The Sipsey Street Irregulars’ Mike Vanderboegh presents, that view, as does Western Rifle Shooters Association, and prominent libertarian commentator Claire Wolfe may be even more blisteringly critical–not an easy feat.

Read more from this story HERE.

Teacher Tells Fourth Graders to Write, 'I am Willing to Give up Some of my Constitutional Rights…to be Safer'

/7 Comments/in , , /by

Photo Credit: The Blaze

The words are written in crayon, in the haphazard bumpiness of a child’s scrawl.

“I am willing to give up some of my constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure.”

They’re the words that Florida father Aaron Harvey was stunned to find his fourth-grade son had written, after a lesson in school about the Constitution.

Harvey’s son attends Cedar Hills Elementary in Jacksonville, Fla. Back in January, a local attorney came in to teach the students about the Bill of Rights. But after the attorney left, fourth-grade teacher Cheryl Sabb dictated the sentence to part of the class and had them copy it down, he said.

The paper sat unnoticed in Harvey’s son’s backpack for several months until last week, when his son’s mother almost threw it away. The words caught her eye in the trash, and she showed it to Harvey, who said he was at a loss for words. He asked his son, who said Sabb had spoken the sentence out loud and told them to write it down. Harvey said he asked some of his son’s classmates and got a similar answer.

Read more from this story HERE.