However, I honestly believe, when push comes to shove, the citizens will simply rise up and remove the criminals in both Washington and the state legislatures and the methods used will not be pretty. Want to see a pretty good dramatization of what happens when people decide to stand and fight? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067800/?ref_=sr_2
the national ID.
Visit the Mission Command Center & Join Our Ranks!
Good video and Woods makes some good points however the supreme court has already ruled on this all the states need to do is ignore any unconstitutional laws period.
Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137 (1803):
“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.”
Murdok v. Penn. 319 US 105:(1943)
“A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution... No state may convert any secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it.”
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Al. 373 US 262:(1962)
“If the state does convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it, you can ignore the license and a fee and engage the right with impunity.
These rulings have never been overturned and a few people still use them to win in court there is no reason the states cannot stand on them and simply ignore the law there is no need to file suite again on these rights.
End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!
seems to indicate that often times these cases don't hold up as a defense because most of us have signed on to the Uniform Commercial Code by accepting the compelled benefit of discharging our debt with limited liability instead of paying the debt. E.g. When I pay $5 for a gallon of milk, I receive a real thing of value in exchange for money that is not backed by anything real & concrete. The UCC does not guarantee the protection of any of your Constitutional rights UNLESS you have reserved your rights in a timely manner (by signing your driver's license, registration or any contract, 'without prejudice UCC 1-308'...this is a reference to a particular part of the UCC which allows you to reserve your rights). Unfortunately that often doesn't work either when you face a judge in court. Many of them are on to this whole freeman, sovereign citizen defense & will do anything to prevent you from exercising your rights. This is where judicial activism comes in...those willing to make the effort to appeal to higher courts to set precedents that help to protect the rights of the rest of us.
More UCC info:
As good as that sounds, that case set the precedent that the SCOTUS was to determine the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. That is not what the framers intended at all. The signers of the contract, the States, were to determine that.
Live Free Or Die
On the docket... feels like I got a slice of Freedom Watch.
"I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."
There is no duration defined in the Oath
I miss that show :(