“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” ― Frédéric Bastiat
Somehow or another, the American people have been deceived into believing that judges are above the law (Amos 5:7).
They have been led to believe that judges can play the activist and or the legislators from the bench at will. Nothing could be further from the truth!
A judge, regardless of what capacity that he may sit in, is to play the referee per se to discover the moral law that God has given and apply, nothing more and nothing less (Deuteronomy 25:1; Article 3, Section 1 U.S. Constitution). They are appointed to uphold the law, not to tear it down (Psalm 94:20).
What we have seen in this country over the last 5 decades that I have been upon this earth is nothing short of judicial tyranny.
Let’s go through some of the acts of tyranny that we have seen from the bench in recent decades.
The late Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated, “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.”
During her criminal tenure, Ginsburg was in support of the murder of over 30 million babies in the womb during her criminal tenure (Article 3, Section 1 of the US Constitution; Proverbs 6:17; 1 John 3:4).
She said, “Frankly, I had thought at the time of Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth. And particularly growth in populations that we do not want to have too many of.”
The late Justice Scalia stated:
“The Constitution contains no right to abortion. It is not to be found in the longstanding traditions of our society. Nor can it be deduced from the text of the Constitution.”
“hands that kill the innocent…” -Proverbs 6:17
Then there was Elena Kagan and just in time. Before the elections of 2012, Barrack Obama came out in support of homosexual “marriage.” Of course, he first had to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and put in place 225 homosexuals in key positions…such as the Supreme Court… before he made his announcement.
Elena Kagan is the former dean of students at Harvard. Contrary to Harvard’s founding mottos, “For Christ and the Church” and “For the glory of Christ,” Kagan is known for “Queerifying Harvard.”
During her tenure, she did the following:
Kagan hired former ACLU lawyer William Rubenstein to teach “queer” legal theory, in which he taught courses on taking up new identities such as bisexuality, transgender f**k, involving polygamy, sadomasochism, and the sexuality of minors.
Kagan also hired other radicals (a lesbian and a transsexual) to teach transgender law courses, as well as Cass Sunstein who has written in support of polygamy and free-for-all marriage relationships.
Kagan viciously attacked our military in opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” even banning military recruiters from coming on campus. Kagan’s attempt to ban the recruiters was unsuccessful, and even after losing her legal campaign, she encouraged students to continue protesting them.
Kagan’s radical activism on campus was so toxic that there was even a campaign to make the entire university trans-inclusive, using Harvard’s “gender identity” non-discrimination policy to spew gender confusion among students on campus.
Elena Kagan has never judged a case a day in her life, yet Obama, unqualified for office himself, has seen fit to “qualify” her on the Supreme Court bench, just in time for the Court to review homosexual marriage.
The question is, whose law? The laws of our republic, which are derived from God.
As Thaddeus Stevens said in his debate on the floor over the 14th Amendment, “no distinction would be tolerated in this purified republic but what arose from merit and conduct.”
William Blackstone, author of Commentaries on the Laws of England and whom our founders studied when establishing America, stated, “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.”
America needs to come to terms and understand that no president, no administration, no Supreme Court, has the right to break God’s law.
Then we have Sonia Sotomayor. Her time at Princeton takes up much of the book, but her account of her alma mater left a lot out, especially her involvement in left-wing politics and an explicitly anti-white club.
In fact, despite her self-description as “more as a mediator than a crusader” on racial and political issues, the archives of Princeton show that it was just the opposite.
According to The Daily Princetonian, Sotomayor even “helped shape” Princeton’s affirmative action practices and used her position as a student judge to advance a left-wing agenda.
As a sophomore, Sotomayor, then co-chairman of the Puerto Rican student group Accion Puertorriquena, filed an April 1974 complaint with the New York office of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) demanding that Princeton do a better job recruiting Latino administrators, faculty, and students. She delivered not one, but two letters to the president of the university calling for explicit quotas and timetables for Latino students, faculty, and administrators—and got results.
“Over the next few years, the University established new hiring and recruitment practices that gradually changed the ethnic makeup of the faculty as well as the student body,” wrote The Daily Princetonian in 2009.
Sotomayor demanded more Latinos on campus. She condemned Princeton’s administrators for showing “a total absence of regard, concern, and respect” for Latinos and accused them of organizing “an attempt—a successful attempt so far—to relegate an important cultural sector of the population to oblivion” in a letter to the editor on May 10, 1974.
Sotomayor saw an “Institutional pattern of discrimination” at Princeton. Later in a 1996 speech, she described the complaint as Princeton’s “Affirmative action failures” and the ensuing pro-racial preferences as results. “A short time later, Princeton hired its first Hispanic assistant dean of students.”
As we all know, two years ago, Chief Justice John Roberts changed the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate into a tax and thus rescued President Obama’s signature legislation. What you may not know is that with this sleight of hand—or flick of the wrist—he actually sent Obamacare flying from the constitutional frying pan into the constitutional fire.
That is if you accept the Great Alchemist’s transmogrification of a penalty-enforced regulation into a mere tax on the condition of not owning health insurance—in other words, a “unicorn tax,” a creature of no known provenance that will never be seen again—if you accept that, you torque up the ACA’s constitutional tension vis-à-vis the Origination Clause.
Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 says: “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills.” This clause was put in to ensure that the most awesome federal power was lodged in the political body most sensitive to public opinion.
“The power to tax is the power to destroy,” John Marshall wrote in the foundational 1819 case of McCulloch v. Maryland, so the Framers wanted to ensure that any such destruction came from the people themselves.
Again, the Judicial branch in this country has now become renowned for gutting the pith and marrow of the laws that they are to simply discover and apply. They are doing their best to deceive the people into believing that they have the right in doing so, they do not!
In conclusion: These corrupt un-American judges if you will are attempting to transform this country to that of Europe, are you going to let them do it (Isaiah 5:20)?
Become an insider!
Sign up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media.