Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

you have a right to challenge any law!

Expand Messages
  • Don Schwarz
    Thanks to a fellow Patriot who alerted me to this case. Now read these rulings to see what the Supreme Court is telling the American People. 1] ... CHICAGO &
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks to a fellow Patriot who alerted me to this case.

      Now read these rulings to see what the Supreme Court
      is telling the American People.

      1]
      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      CHICAGO & G. T. R. CO. v. WELLMAN, 143 U.S. 339 (1892)


      at page 345 of the constitutional ruling of rights retained by the
      people----------------------

      "Whenever, in pursuance of an honest and actual antagonistic assertion of
      rights by one individual against another, there is presented a question
      involving the validity of any act of any legislature, state or federal, and
      the decision necessarily rests on the competency of the legislature to so
      enact, the court must, in the exercise of its solemn duties, determine
      whether the act be constitutional or not; but such an exercise of power is
      the ultimate and supreme function of courts. It is legitimate only in the
      last resort, and as a necessity in the determination of real, earnest, and
      vital controversy between individuals. It never was the thought that, by
      means of a friendly suit, a party beaten in the legislature could transfer
      to the courts an inquiry as to the constitutionality of the legislative act."

      2]----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      HURTADO v. PEOPLE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 110 U.S. 516 (1884)

      at page 533 of the ruling on constitutional rights held by the People ------

      "Indeed, the great office of statutes is to remedy defects in the common
      law as they are developed, and to adapt it to the changes of time and
      circumstances.' "

      at page 535 of the ruling ----------------------------

      "It is not every act, legislative in form, that is law. Law is something
      more than mere will exerted as an act of power."

      3]-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      MUTUAL LOAN INSURANCE CO. Vs MARTELL, 222 US 225

      at page 233 of the ruling on constitutional rights of the People
      -------------------------

      "Certain general principles, however, must be taken for granted. It is
      certainly the province of the State, by its legislature, to adopt such
      policy as it seems best. There are constitutional limitations, of course,
      but these allow a very comprehensive range of judgment. And within that
      range the Massachusetts statute can be justified. Legislation cannot be
      judged by theoretical standards. It must be tested by the concrete
      conditions which induced it."
      ======================================================


      WE have the RIGHT to challenge any law;

      WE have the RIGHT to challenge any law for the law
      may NOT be constitutional;

      We have the RIGHT to challenge any law for the law may
      not be constitutional for a law is only constitutional if it
      actually DOES SOMETHING!!!


      A law that performs no function, addresses no evil or is
      not induced by "concrete conditions" is NOT a
      constitutional law.

      Laws are enacted to accomplish that the PEOPLE have
      the lawful exercise of their RIGHTS secured by actions
      of government or facilitated by actions of government.

      THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT EXIST TO SUPPORT THE ENACTMENT
      OF LAWS THAT PERFORM NO FUNCTION.

      THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT EXIST TO SUPPORT LAWS
      THAT VIOLATE OUR INALIENABLE RIGHTS.

      NO LAW can subvert or injuriously restrain the LAWFUL
      exercise of and inalienable right.

      ALL RIGHTS - MUST AND SHALL BE EXERCISABLE
      regardless if there is a law that addresses that right.

      RIGHTS are NOT subservient to whether or not a law
      exists to secure or facilitate same.

      RIGHTS EXISTED even before there were "laws".

      You had better get your mind into this fact.

      "Laws" are but window dressing in support of inalienable rights.


      What do "Laws" do?

      Secure and facilitate the lawful exercise of our inalienable right
      of the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.

      Any law that subverts or injuriously restrains these rights,
      is null, void, moot and without standing in any Court in this nation.

      Those laws which you do not challenge, have NOT cause you
      any legal injury.

      Silence is acceptance.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Don
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.