Nov 24, 2014
Tea Party Tribune
Tea Party Tribune
Tea Party and Political News Reporting

State Constitution’s Declaration of Rights.

   

the-usa-constitution

I DEMAND MY FREE REPUBLIC
AMERICAN FORM OF SELF GOVERNMENT BACK!

“Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure. –Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME

Our legislators are not sufficiently apprized of the rightful limits of their power; that their true office is to declare and enforce only our natural rights and duties, and to take none of them from us.Thomas Jefferson, Letter to F. W. Gilmer, 1816

DID YOU KNOW IT IS ILLEGAL FOR ANYONE WORKING WITHIN THE MILITARY OR THE GOVERNMENT TO CONSPIRE TO DEPRIVE YOU OF YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?  

UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 18 – CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I – CRIMES
CHAPTER 13 – CIVIL RIGHTS 
 

§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.

Virginia’s HB 1160 Unlawful Detention Bill

will become the model for the Nation to counter the federal NDAA  National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

The provisions of this section shall not apply to participation by state or local law enforcement or Virginia National Guard or Virginia Defense Force in joint task forces, partnerships, or other similar cooperative agreements with federal law enforcement as long as they are not for the purpose of participating in such detentions under § 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.

Why can’t we write a simple bill that is easy to understand and easier to enforce due to its overwhelming simplicity? 

Stating principles is what needs to happen here, we can see how the ‘wording’ just complicates what should be very simple.

Doesn’t matter what happens to this legislation now.  It is so convoluted it means nothing.

 

I say this bill no longer matters nor has the ability to protect any of us. 

A bill that IS easy to understand and enforce would be as follows:

SUMMARY:  Human beings are, by the act of being created, endowed with God endowed rights.  We have a US Constitution that protects these rights.  We have a Virginia Constitution that protects these rights.  Any employee, elected or non elected officials working for Virginia and drawing a salary with benefits from Virginia taxpayers is prohibited from engaging in any activity, investigation, prosecution, or detainment that would violate any Virginian citizens’ basic fundamental God endowed and state protected rights that include: the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, the right to protect against unreasonable searches and seizures. NO person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, nor shall any person be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; right to a speedy trial, witnesses, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; right to a trial by jury, no excessive bail or cruel punishment; as clearly articulated and commonly understood and stated in the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights and in the Virginia Constitution’s Declaration of Rights.

Unless a bill this simple is passed and signed into law, there will be no change in the mentality or potential illegal and unconstitutional behavior of those sworn to protect our constitutional rights.

Our bills need to be a reflection of principle not modern day fork tongued legalese.

Declaration of Rights of Virginia Constitution

The Virginia Declaration of Rights is a document drafted in 1776 to proclaim the inherent rights of men, including the right to rebel against “inadequate” government. It influenced a number of later documents, including the United States Declaration of Independence (1776), the United States Bill of Rights (1789), and the French Revolution‘s Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789).

Virginia Declaration of Rights
Created May 1776
Ratified June 12, 1776
Location Library of Congress (first draft)[1]
Author(s) George Mason (primary), Thomas Ludwell Lee
Purpose Declare the inherent rights of Virginians (and mankind in general).

Marshall Sends McDonnell Memo on why he should sign HB1160

Document Analyzes Federal Law’s Unconstitutionality in Unlimited Detention of Citizens

MANASSAS, April 4 – Delegate Bob Marshall today sent Gov. Bob McDonnell an 11-page memorandum analyzing legal aspects of his HB 1160 and detailing reasons why McDonnell should sign the bill into law.

Marshall’s HB 1160 would prevent agencies and employees at all levels of Virginia’s state and local governments from assisting federal authorities in the unlimited detention of United States citizens without charges or court hearing merely on suspicion of involvement in terrorist activities.

Obscure sections of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), signed into law by President Obama in late December, permits such unlimited detentions by United States military forces and federal law enforcement agencies.

Marshall contends that the NDAA authority deprives United States citizens of their rights under the United States and Virginia constitutions.

HB 1160 was passed by overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both houses of the Virginia General Assembly and is on McDonnell’s desk awaiting his signature. The governor is reported to have reservations about the bill.

The extensive memorandum was prepared for Marshall by attorney Herbert W. Titus, a former law school professor. Currently, Titus is “of counsel” with the Vienna, Va., law firm of William J. Olson, former chairman of the Fairfax County Republican Party. Olson’s firm specializes in constitutional law.

The Titus memorandum notes that “a potential additional complication” is that McDonnell, by Obama appointment, serves on a bipartisan Council of Governors (COG) formed in 2010 to assist federal authorities “on matters related to the National Guard and civil support missions.” COG’s duties include sharing information and advice relating to “homeland defense” and “synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities within the United States.”

“Since the governor’s oath includes upholding the Constitutions of both the United
States and the Commonwealth,” Titus wrote in his memorandum, “and since both documents secure to the people the rights to a speedy and public trial, confrontation of witnesses, jury trial, and due process of law, it seems reasonable to expect that the governor will sign H.B. 1160. In so doing, he would fulfill the historic role of the States as being guardians of the people from usurpations of authority from the central government.”

The memorandum contends McDonnell “certainly has the authority to make his own assessment of the federal statute’s constitutionality now, without having to wait for a judicial decision after some person is denied the very rights that the constitution was designed to protect.”

“Thus,” the memorandum concludes, “it would appear that the only reason why the governor reasonably would veto H.B. 1160 would be that he believes that NDAA is constitutional – and we certainly trust that is not the case.”

Google your State by its State Constitution under Declaration of Rights under [name of state] Constitution.  e.g. Arizona Rights is under Section 2 of the Arizona Constitution.

1 Comment

  1. Victoria

    April 16, 2012 at 6:27 am

    The following is from Rep. Bob Marshall:
    HB 1160. (See http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?121+f… The vote will occur on Wednesday April 18, 2012.

    I first heard about the terrible detention provisions being considered for insertion as section 1021 into the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 around Thanksgiving Day (2011).

    I hoped then that the Congress would come to its senses, which it did not. I saw this provision being supported by all too many Republicans joining Democrats in Congress who seemed to have forgotten that they were bound by the U.S. Constitution. The main problem initially was the Senate Armed Services Committee.

    At one point the NDAA Bill had a provision in it which would have prevented the President from detaining American Citizens, but the White House, according to Senator Carl Levin (D), wanted that provision removed. So, we have a president who says he won’t use a power he wanted left expressly in the NDAA bill. This is not comforting.

    So on New Year's Eve when Americans were celebrating and enjoying their family life, Barrack Obama signed into law this terrible bill which puts the Liberty of all Americans into jeopardy, despite his promise that he would not use the powers he was given under the bill.

    At first it seemed I could do little to affect what Congress or the President did. But then I reflected that the states are not required to be mere administrative extensions of the national government. So I determined that we in Virginia would formally refuse to cooperate with the U.S. Military with respect to the unlawful detention of Virginians under NDAA without the full protection of our Bill of Rights.

    Each step of the way, I had the assistance of two well-respected constitutional attorneys who have been instrumental in fighting for liberty on many fronts across the nation, and I am greatly indebted to them for their time and analysis throughout the process.

    The Senate also removed language about participation in "prosecutions" because literally there are no prosecutions under this section of federal law — which is why the detentions are unconstitutional. The Governor, in consultation with the Attorney General’s office, felt strongly that HB 1160 could be misread to ban participation in these legitimate law-enforcement task forces, and we agreed on language which addressed his concern without violating the principle that Virginia officials were to be prevented from participating in any possible future task forces relating to unlawful detention.

    Second, the Governor wanted to make certain that Virginia's officials would not be caught in an unintentional violation of HB 1160. Therefore, he wanted the standard to be "knowingly." I had no problem with this, because I don't want this bill to be a trap for law enforcement officers, I want it to be a policy that guides the judgment of our civilian police and National Guard members and other state agencies.

    If a state official shares a bit of information in good faith which is then misused by the federal government, then that would not be done "knowingly" — and I agreed to that change.

    Also, it is important to remember that no version of HB 1160 created a crime. Rather, it states a policy of the Commonwealth, and serves as the basis for administrative regulations which will limit the Virginia Guard and the Virginia Militia. There is no stated direct sanction for violating it, except those employment reprimands which apply to those who disregard the public policies of the Commonwealth. So, one would hope that anyone who violated the policies of the General Assembly would find themselves quickly moved out of a position of public trust and into the private sector.

    HB 1160 is still a powerful statement and is very effective in withdrawing Virginia from participation in any NDAA detentions and setting an example to our sister states of the Union. If passed by the General Assembly and signed by the Governor, HB 1160 will be the first state law of its kind, prohibiting state cooperation with the U.S. Military with respect to detentions of Virginians under NDAA. And it will send a powerful message to Congress and the Executive.

    Other states are considering taking some form of action against NDAA detentions, but most of those are non-binding resolutions. With HB 1160, Virginia will have enacted a binding law. It is my hope that many other states will follow the lead of Virginia in refusing to cooperate in detentions in violation of the U.S. and state constitutions. Even more important, it is my hope that those states that do take such action will serve as a wake-up call for those in Congress to undo the harm they have done by enacting NDAA section 1021

    Very influential individuals from Washington urged Governor McDonnell to veto HB 1160 on “practical” grounds as well as claims that HB 1160 was unconstitutional. Your strong support for HB 1160 kept this bill alive so I thank you for your efforts.

    Complete article Posted at The Patriots
    http://richmondpatriots.ning.com/ National Site America Conservative2Conservative http://americac2c.com/

Leave a Reply