CBS NEWS: 'Let's Give Up On The Constitution'
Is the U.S. Constitution obsolete?
For anyone who missed this a few weeks ago, myself included -- CBS Sunday Morning with Georgetown professor of Constitutional Law, Louis Seidman.
What happens if freedom of speech falls out of public favor. Does Professor Seidman believe that we should therefore abandon our most sacred right because the only document protecting it happens to be... old?
You want to change the Constitution? Get an amendment passed. Until then, keep your hands of the parchment.
---
Transcript
Georgetown professor of Constitutional Law Louis Michael Seidman (Bio - Link)
I've got a simple idea: Let's give up on the Constitution. I know, it sounds radical, but it's really not. Constitutional disobedience is as American as apple pie. For example, most of our greatest Presidents -- Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, and both Roosevelts -- had doubts about the Constitution, and many of them disobeyed it when it got in their way.
To be clear, I don't think we should give up on everything in the Constitution. The Constitution has many important and inspiring provisions, but we should obey these because they are important and inspiring, not because a bunch of people who are now long-dead favored them two centuries ago. Unfortunately, the Constitution also contains some provisions that are not so inspiring. For example, one allows a presidential candidate who is rejected by a majority of the American people to assume office. Suppose that Barack Obama really wasn't a natural-born citizen. So what? Constitutional obedience has a pernicious impact on our political culture. Take the recent debate about gun control. None of my friends can believe it, but I happen to be skeptical of most forms of gun control. I understand, though, that's not everyone's view, and I'm eager to talk with people who disagree.
But what happens when the issue gets Constitutional-ized? Then we turn the question over to lawyers, and lawyers do with it what lawyers do. So instead of talking about whether gun control makes sense in our country, we talk about what people thought of it two centuries ago. Worse yet, talking about gun control in terms of constitutional obligation needlessly raises the temperature of political discussion. Instead of a question on policy, about which reasonable people can disagree, it becomes a test of one's commitment to our foundational document and, so, to America itself.
This is our country. We live in it, and we have a right to the kind of country we want. We would not allow the French or the United Nations to rule us, and neither should we allow people who died over two centuries ago and knew nothing of our country as it exists today. If we are to take back our own country, we have to start making decisions for ourselves, and stop deferring to an ancient and outdated document.
Here's a good cartoon:
Founding Fathers Discuss The Constitution
Reader Comments (46)
So, if you can cherry pick the constitution because you have deluded yourself to believe that you know better than the SCOTUS or all the rest of us then I get to play that game too. For example, there is NOTHING in the constitution about the American economy being organized around a capitalist economic structure, so I call for a top tax of 99% on every dollar of income over $100k no matter the source and between that and a balanced budget amendment we could pay off our debt within 10 years. If that does not retire our debt then a wealth/property tax can.
But I have seen this red herring way too often in the last four years, that Obama is gutting the constitution and ruining the nation with debt, now he is after your guns. It was Bush that said the constitution was nothing but a goddamned piece of paper, ran up more debt than all previous presidents, and set us on a track where the next president had no choice but to continue his kleptocracy, and for the paranoid second amendment types NOBODY is after your guns, but you keep displaying childish and insane behaviors regarding guns and we will have to reconsider that!
Personally I have had it up to here with the whining over Obama's presidency, after 8 years of BushCo corporate fascism Barak is a breath of fresh air.
In any event, the US Supreme Court has already ruled in District of Columbia v Heller, that the Second Amendment confers an individual, not collective, right to keep and bear arms. The specific language of the Second Amendment reserves the right to bear arms to the people, not to the militia.
And the US Supreme Court has also ruled, in United States v Miller that the Second Amendment reserves to the people the same weapons used by the standing army.
Pray tell, professor, who will enact our sagacious laws? Certainly not Congress, that spawn of Article I of the... constitution. Likewise we can't rely on the Article II executive branch to enforce the laws, nor on the Article III judiciary to interpret them.
But those are trifling formalities for wise men like the professor, who must answer more fundamental questions such as: what, if not a constitution, is to prevent the enactment of a law providing once and for all for a dictator who'll recognize no votes and any laws not in accordance with his own whims? And where exactly in the first place does the authority to bypass the constitution as the wise professor advises reside?
I'll tell you where, even if the professor will not: in force. It would seem the professor is an advocate of dictatorship, even if he doesn't have the balls to come right out and say it, or the sense to see that he'll be the first one executed under his own system.
Marcus needs to check out the Dick act, the Militia act of 1792, and this pesky old thing...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062802134.html
Regards,
RJ O'Guillory
Author-
Webster Groves-The Life of an Insane Family
The Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., poem "Old Ironsides" on the battleship Constitution is my reply to this Bolshevik.
The point I like is that most of the arguments for maintaining loyalty to the Constitution go to "it's the law," not that "it's the right thing." We should argue both, not rest on absolute law concepts.
However, people like Seidman appear to have forgotten that the Constitution is how the federal government came into being--and the only thing that holds these independent nation states together. If we did away with the Constitution, we'd do away with federal government.
Legally, I suppose, we'd have to revert to the Articles of Confederation. (Hmmm... Maybe not such a bad idea... hmmmmmm), or else there would be nothing holding the states into any form of alliance or unification. I'm fairly confident that this would not be a good thing.
Even so, I really doubt that this is where Seidman is coming from, or I might have to hail the idea--with some caveats. I rather suspect that his point of view is that "we have this nation" (offensive designation even to the most voracious of the Federalists) and its power structure, "let's just continue, except dispense with the restrictions on it." As in, no rudder, no keel, just run the motors and hoist the sails and see where (and how) we land as 'one nation.'" This is an idiotic idea.
No, we should indeed correct the oversights that led to the grossly over-grown powers of the federal government, of the executive, the Congress and even the courts. We should amend with a strong statement that defiance of the Constitution in any branch dissolves the law established by said sedition, and that impeachment proceedings would be automatic for all in favor of such "laws." Yeah, the idea needs more development, but that's the right general vector.
"Pack up all your stuff, and go find another country to live in that respects your freedom more than this one does..."
And good riddance to you sir...
fs
Sorry; didn't realize it wouldn't show.
A couple more notes: Markus:
--To deny that they're after the guns is just completely ridiculous. Stated purposes, laws already passed, laws in the hopper... there's just no denying it. They probably won't succeed, at least not right away or by direct means, but they're after them and will take them if we let them. And in some states, they're already at it. Lying about it is only demeaning to the liar.
--Your whole argument is specious, because, as has been demonstrated even by those who are no friend of the Second Amendment (Lawrence Tribe), the "militia clause" is nothing but precursor and a rationale. To then hang on to the meat of the amendment is not to cherry pick. So, the "cherry picking" argument is DOA.
--Or perhaps Edwin Vieira is correct: http://reasonaction.blogspot.com/2013/02/i-stand-corrected-and-yes-yes-yes.html Vieira points up that the Second is a guarantee of a militia, which we do not have. Guaranteeing a militia pretty well kills any laws against guns. And don't hit me with that old saw about "national guard is the modern version of militia." It's not. Militia, by definition, is not a professional military. National Guard, by definition, is a professional military.
--Or perhaps, rather than being tired of criticism of the Obama Administration, you're an Obama apparatchik. Obama is NOTHING but an extension of the Bush sedition, which was an extension of the Clinton... Bush... Reagan... etc. sedition. It's time to find and try the puppetmasters who run this country really, who control the presidential and congressional puppets, and put them out of power. For good. All nice and lawful, of course, lest anyone mistake my meaning.
Seidman and his lib brethren captured Con law in our law schools many moons ago--the 60s hippie types. Think Bill and Hil. One of the few Con law scholars on the other side of the debate? Robert Bork. RIP. Bork and his formidable intellect were not messed with by these hacks because their lawless and specious arguments crumbled against his well reasoned, lawful positions.
Today, you do NOT own your land. You rent it from your government. Your land is taxed and you have, in most cases, a fee simple deed, which IS NOT the highest form of land ownership in the U.S.A. Allodial TItle is the HIGHEST FORM of land ownership in the U.S.A.
Electors were those who held ALLODIAL TITLES to their land. The Electoral College was instituted so that those with a vested interest in the nation, the LAND OWNERS, would have final decision as to the makeup of the government because THEY HAD THE MOST TO LOSE than someone who owns nothing.
The United States was not formed as a Democracy. It was formed as a Republic. The money power has certainly corrupted this government culminating in the establishment of the privately owned Federal Reserve System, which has DESTROYED the Republic of the United States and replaced it with a debt slave society.
Professor Seidman to call himself a professor of Constitutional Law demonstrates his TOTAL IGNORANCE of CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. The man should be immediately fired - not for his political beliefs - but for his sheer STUPIDITY of the subject matter.
What are you going to do about NDAA, FISA, warrantless domestic wiretapping, on & on & etc. Nothing!!
I can't seem to find what Habeas Corpus is about.
The 2nd Amendment plainly states that you must carry a piece of paper (permit) when you carry an "arms" concealed. LOL
When you go to the airports for a flight you WILL NOT CARRY your beloved "arms". You WILL SUBMIT to all required searches. You WILL ALLOW the TSA to put their hands anywhere on your body they see fit and you WILL SUBMISSIVELY allow the TSA to strip search your spouses, your children, your grandchildren, your grandparents anytime they feel like it.
Be good little boys & girls & do as you are told & run home with your tail tucked between your legs & hide under the cover.
Next rant scheduled in one hour.
DHS built domestic surveillance tech into Predator drones
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57572207-38/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/
Homeland Security's specifications say drones must be able to detect whether a civilian is armed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wcSYGh3W89U
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/03/01/popular-standard-shotgun-could-be-banned-under-proposed-bill/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/9904314/Americans-renouncing-citizenship-to-become-British-thanks-to-tax-rise.html
http://beforeitsnews.com/blogging-citizen-journalism/2013/03/the-obamas-i-knew-they-had-both-lost-their-law-license-but-i-didnt-know-why-until-i-read-this-2445938.html
Not sure how legit this story is...
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/man-deserved-arrest/
Stunning...
http://patdollard.com/2013/03/high-school-student-disarms-gunman-gets-suspended/
Video is here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aYqosxS3T6g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oXM-YHJQqlg
Brig. Gen. Katz said their forces were responsible for the unintended deaths . I'm tired of the BS. This is murder. Know your target. Know the background, "unintended" my ass. If one pulls the trigger, they are guilty. This also applies to anyone in any military & any officers that give an order, making them complicit in the crime. Wonder how long before the Muslim world really gets pissed off? I heard that that there Packiestan had some of them there Nookleer Weapons.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/02/25
In regards to what happened to Ron Paul, that was a political convention, a federal convention on authority of the Constitution is a legal convention. What ever is proposed must be ratified. It's the process which will reactivate the common sense behind our sovereign power as citizens. The convention clause is part of the high law for a reason. For now it's a matter of whether or not enough Americans will buy it.
Please research and look in to this. The Article V Convention is not a risk and harms nothing but corruption itself.
I am the person who wrote down the description and serial numbers on the pistol they found on a murdered Vince Foster (assistant council to the president under Bill Clinton) in Marcey Park, Wash.D.C.. My experience was when it was last purchased in Seattle in late 1983. Hillary had an instantly regretful party volunteer sneak and buy it for her during the 1984 campaign primary season. She took it over state lines, and after Foster's murder, the FBI told the 6 interviewed Seattle witnesses to this purchase to keep their mouths shut. A marine guard long ago told me Foster was murdered in the White House and carried out through one of the tunnels. Other reports say he was carried out in a carpet layer's van. These pigs play for keeps, and unless you are emotionally and physically stable, aware, and strong enough, they will gleefully roll over you like a baby chicken, and we all lose. Do you have experience with law enforcement or combat training? Get some. You are going to need it after attempting to peacefully and legally deal with this foreign based invading entity. These traitors will not cede authority. They might kill you, but there would be no witnesses or clues. This is today's reality, which we must dominate, control, and be rid of. It is unfortunate. The world needs for us to succeed, not become martyrs. You do not decide whether you are a threat to them. They decide.
Spell 'illuminati' backwards and add a '.com'. Visit the site. Still want to help?
Steps 1) and 2); Kill your CFRtv and refuse Rothschild Associated Press articles.
Step 3) Stay legal.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42592.pdf
Regards,
RJ O'Guillory
Author-
Webster Groves - The Life of an Insane Family
[America can have a Constitution Supporting/Defending President this election, 2016, instead of the grand-jury-proven/warranted/reprovable Constitution Opposing/Disqualified opposing, other applicants/candidates.......all we need are these deficit-eliminating-grand-jury-warrants enforced.......... guaranteed*** .......... the only applicant/candidate in 2016 who's victory will withstand any grand jury's scrutiny versus any/all evidence to the contrary........to simplify where the problems are and who is actually supporting/defending the Constitution for you to clearly and undeniably see what "criminal/commie occupation" looks like.......... stealing $4+ trillion per year.......any/all opponents being guilty/grand-jury-warranted for felony-criminal-civic-duty-negligence, misprision, etc. and arrestable, right now]!!!!
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
USA Today says "he's [Trump's] not qualified"....But, they didn't tell you that "SOMEONE HAS ALREADY USED "CONSTITUTIONAL DEFAULT" (THE GRAND JURY MALFUNCTION [IT NOT WORKING] THAT'S PRODUCED THE PROVEN-FALSE-DEFICITS; AND THE STUFF THEY PROSECUTE YOU WITH ON FEDERAL/STATE STUDENT LOANS, ETC.) TO CONSTITUTIONALLY/LEGALLY WIN THE PRESIDENCY" (MAKING ALL FURTHER/FUTURE VOTES, ELECTIONS, ETC. DOUBLE JEOPARDY, BILLS OF ATTAINDER, MISAPPROPRIATIONS, NEGLIGENCE, CONSTITUTIONAL OPPOSITION, CRIMINAL-OFFICE OCCUPATION, MISPRISION, MALFEASANCE, ETC.)......AND HE'S ENCOURAGED EVERYONE ELSE TO "TAKE BACK THEIR GOVERNMENT IN 10 DAYS (15 MAX.) TOO, USING CONSTITUTIONAL DEFAULT"...www.TakeBackYourGovernmentCampaign.blogspot.com...... [THEY'RE STILL "KARL MARX NEW MOUTH-ING/OVERTHROWING/WAR-MAKING", INSTEAD OF "FRANKLIN MERCURY-ING/SUPPORTING-&-DEFENDING-PROPER-GOVERNMENT-FUNCTION-GRAND-JURY-FUNCTION/PEACE]...see www.GrandJuriesNow.blogspot.com too!!! {NEWS ON "FALSE POLLS" IS GOOD, BUT, WHAT ABOUT "NEWS ON WHO ALREADY LEGALLY/CONSTITUTIONALLY-WON AND HOLDS WARRANTS TO THE OFFICE, PAYCHECKS, ETC.?"}.....HE "SECURED THE OFFICE" FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE 1980s, AS THE "10 GENERAL MILITARY STANDING-ORDERS" ORDERED HIM TO DO!!!
***[[That's a "trillion a count" and "incarcerations/arrests" are due/grand-jury-warranted, right now, for any government employee failing/refusing to enforce these warrants and for any negative comments..........especially, any related over the public airwaves or in the newspapers...........for felony-criminal-civic-duty-negligence regarding these stolen benefits/premiums as well as obstruction of justice for either negative/assaultive remarks or failure/refusal to enforce these grand-jury-warrants.........for either/or/both the government-office/paycheck/etc. or "deficit elimination".........negative remarks or failures/refusals to enforce either warrants, for governnent.offices "won via default" or deficit.eliminating.trust.upgrades, are illegal and arrest.requiring, right now and until these trusts/budget deficits are eliminated and proper grand jury and new-deal-trust functions obtained/restored!!!]]