11 votes

No more right to assemble in the US...

It is every Americans' right to protest, correct? To pick up a sign, walk a picket line, yell crazy things through a bullhorn, to make themselves heard, and to often just make backends of themselves. Most of us have never done it. Most of us would find it embarrassing. Many of us would be terrified to do it. But it a right, it is written into our Constitution. And it is should be a right. As we have seen historically, in Poland, East Germany, the former Soviet Union, and in the present in Egypt (twice), Turkey, Brazil, Tunisia, Greece, and even Sweden, protest, indeed mass protest plays a crucial role in protecting and sometimes in creating representative democracy.

Obama just made it illegal in the United States.

http://rt.com/usa/trespass-bill-obama-secret-227/



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
meekandmild's picture

law of the land

The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for a law which violates the Constitution to be valid. This is succintly stated as follows:
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void. "
Marbury vs Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them quot;
Miranda vs Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.
"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no right; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed."
Norton vs Shelby County118 US 425 p.442
"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, in in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."
16th American Jurisprudence 2d, Section 177
late 2nd, Section 256

The Choke Hold

cinches down just a little bit tighter.

In my humble opinion...

This was the intent and purpose of "Occupy Wall Street". Worst part was how "we the people" all rallied behind it like it was a good thing. I mean basically everyone wanted to "get those dirty hippies off the street". I actually couldn't believe it happened so quietly and with universal acceptance. We lost the right to assemble with a puff of smoke and some well placed mirrors.

While it is a bad law, there are two things:

1. This is old news that most of us know about, from last year. I am glad that you resurfaced it for the unaware :-)

2. Any law repugnant to the Constitution is null and void. There is even a case, Marbury vs Madison 5 U.S. 137.

When people begin to follow laws that are repugnant to the Constitution, precedence becomes easier to set. We must stand tall and proud and reject these corrupted so-called laws.

WE the People PAY and own these public, government, federal structures. I will be damned if I let some corrupt politician tell me that it belongs to them and not me.

Suggestion: Grab a big sign [Hi Granger :-)] head out somewhere and do your duty :-)

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul