1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Arizona, the Constitution, and the USA

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by W.P.T., Aug 6, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. W.P.T.

    W.P.T. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,371
    Explosive new evidence shows ruling of AZ judge illegal


    In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new immigration law is illegal.




    (Daniel Bayer/CBS News via Getty Images). The inept U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder.



    The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part,"Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.



    "Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:



    "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 appellate Jurisdiction."



    In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve a state.



    This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to rule on the issue.



    Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.



    The attorney whose heads-up thinking concerning the Constitution provides the legal remedy for dealing with this blatant disregard for Constitutional law in the article at Canada Free Press, which can be accessed at the link above.



    In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who actually take the Constitution seriously. The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous delay or inaction on the part of the federal government. This information was cited by United Patriots of America.



    From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."



    No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless Mexican invaders who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical facilities with unpaid bills, and even endanger the very lives of citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage in kidnapping, murder, human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile and grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the Mexican border.



    This is every bit as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.



    The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay on the part of the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense.



    This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme Court hear cases involving the states, should be ample legal basis for attorneys representing Arizona to go after the federal government with a vengeance.



    Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have ample legal reason to stand firm against the illegal bullying of an arrogant, lawless federal government.



    It appears we have some Canadians looking out for us also ... "EH" ...
    WPT ... (YAC) ...
     
  2. schutzemgud

    schutzemgud TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    228
    WTP good job finding that! I would love to see that piece of nasty BS overturned from that liberal sell out Judge.

    Mike Sudz
     
  3. jimrich60

    jimrich60 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    810
    The problem with the posting is that the attorney "forgot" to finish quoting the Constitution as it applies. The cited Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 goes on to say "with such exceptions and under such regulations as Congress shall make."

    Unfortunately, this throws the whole clause into a different light, and is being read as Congress can determine what court level even a state based case can be reviewed at. Thus the DOJ filed the case at a lower level federal court. Perhaps not Constitutional, but it is ambiguous, thus they get away with it, as the feds have been, and are doing in many areas today.

    It does not help our cause when supposedly conservative attorneys or others misquote or omit relevant parts of the Constitution, like the libtards regularly do.
     
  4. ou.3200

    ou.3200 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,490
    "with such exceptions and under such regulations as Congress shall make."

    That clause would appear to mean the "exception" or "regulation" shall be made before the case is filed. Did Congress do that?
     
  5. Barrelbulge(Fl)

    Barrelbulge(Fl) Banned User Banned TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    11,666
    Location:
    West Central Florida
    Think this info got to Brewer? She would know what to do with it. BUlge.r
     
  6. W.P.T.

    W.P.T. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,371
    Bulge,

    I sent it to Governor Brewers office via the website, I agree with you ... I don't see where it can hirt anything to have as much information as possible ... I posted it as I recieved it so if anything was deleted it was before I got it ...

    Sheriff Joes continues with his crime sweeps either way, it don't matter ... He can sniff out Illegals like a Bloodhound ... WPT ... (YAC) ...
     
  7. Barrelbulge(Fl)

    Barrelbulge(Fl) Banned User Banned TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    11,666
    Location:
    West Central Florida
    Thanks for doing that. Mike
     
  8. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,538
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    WPT

    "From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

    Bill not a criticism of your efforts here but after jimrich60 posted the additional wording in Article II Sec. 2, I check out the other Article I Sec. 10, And the wording, "engage in War" doesn't seem to be in that Section

    I have given a link to the Article in the Constitution.

    BTW do you have a link to the article that what you posted came from,

    "Constitutional law in the article at Canada Free Press, which can be accessed at the link above."

    This is the reference to link I am incurring about.

    Bob Lawless
     
  9. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    That Az is being invaded is not in question. The facts speak for themselves.
     
  10. Bob Hawkes

    Bob Hawkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,895
    Hey Bill, Is there any truth to the story that Sherrif Joe came from the good State of Mass? Wish we had him here. Stay cool, Bob
     
  11. jimrich60

    jimrich60 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    810
    ou.3200

    In the past, that clause "with such exceptions and under such regulations as Congress shall make" appears to include such things as Congressional creation of lower federal courts. Remember, the Constitution created the Supreme Court, but Congress created the lesser federal courts. So the phrase is open to interpretation per a number of Constitutional scholars. I don't think the Arizona case is likely to be thrown out on the basis of Article III, Sec 2. Rather, we need Arizona to win this case on the merits. That is, Arizona is right and the federal government is wrong, again.

    Jim R
     
  12. WS-1

    WS-1 Banned User Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    3,885
    "or engage in War"-Article 1, Section 10, last paragraph.
     
  13. WilliamMR

    WilliamMR Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,113
    Location:
    Munster, IN
    Very interesting read. The author has it posted on her blog also.
     
  14. W.P.T.

    W.P.T. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,371
    Bob,

    I'm not sure about the Good Sheriff but I think thats a fact ... He has a way about him that just upsets the other Politicos to no end and he keeps on pushing the Immigration thing down their throats ... He makes all of the Crime Sweeps public to give the Illegals a chance to get the Hell out of Dodge and they are either to dumb or to arrogant to leave when warned ... Now, they are saying that all of North America is their country so I guess we here in Arizona are going to be having a lot of company before long ...

    Ivanhoe,

    Typical Political Document where it usually contradicts itself more than once if you read the whole thing ... The High Courts will have to take a peek and see what and how to do it ... The news is saying that more and more Illegals are finding other routes to come north being as Arizona is cracking down and the ones who are here that do not fit into the above statement are leaving by the car loads ... Glad I don't have any grass that needs to be cut ... lol ... WPT ... (YAC) ...
     
  15. sliverbulletexpress

    sliverbulletexpress TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,645
    I know everyone will think I got an early start on drinking this Friday but I've not touched a drop yet. Give this some thought before you come at me as crazy.

    Since certain lands along the Arizona and Mexican border have signs put up warning me as a US Citizen that I can't or won't be safe entering part of my own country I think my rights have been violated according to two parts of the Bill Of Rights.

    My rights under Section 1 of the 14th amendment
    My rights under the 4th amendment.

    Congress is supposed to protect our rights and are allowing a foreign government to interfere with our rights inside our own country.
     
  16. grunt

    grunt TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,915
    Location:
    Thousand Oaks Ca
  17. kolar12

    kolar12 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    622
    Location:
    AZ
    I still can not believe that Jan has the guts to do this. She is as great as sheriff Joe is! I beleive that Napolitano cringes every time her name is mentioned.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.