The Declaration of Independence
Throughout this page, remember the following: The Supreme Court decision, Marbury verses Madison (1803)......
Marbury v. Madison, arguably the most important case in Supreme Court history, was the first court case to apply the principle of "judicial review" -- the power of federal courts to void acts of Congress in conflict with the Constitution.
In other words, all laws perverse to our U.S. Constitution can become null & void as long as courts do their duty; when members of the court do not uphold the constitution, those so involved are Liars to their oath of office
In fact, every politician, and official who has sworn an oath to uphold the constitution should be removed from office, or at least never reelected if/when they fail to uphold the constitution. *The constitution gives We the People the power to accomplish this; the power is called, a VOTE, whether during an election or during a recall proceeding.
Article 3, section 1: The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior...
*Often we hear it said that Supreme Court Judges serve for life....this is not necessarily true. If We the People decide these judges have behaved unfavorably to the constitution, the impeachment process allows the U.S. House of Representatives to draw up "articles of impeachment." When We the People say, get rid of a particular judge, or any other elected official, then each of our representatives, who by the way work for us...not the other way around, are obliged to act according to our wishes. If the House votes to impeach, then the Senate must decide, and so on; this is why it is vitally important we elect people of virtue to represent us in all branches of government.
The Cure: The U.S. Constitution.
If you fear, or are concerned about NWO-New World Order stories/predictions, the Constitution is the cure...if we would just use it! ~Johnny Counterfit
We the People are the three most powerful words in our representative government!
This page will help you and I use those words, along with the entire U.S. Constitution, to improve our lives as the Founding Fathers intended.
This page is non-partisan, as is our U.S. Constitution, and as long as we obey it, it doesn't matter your political party affiliation, nor your race, color, creed, chosen lifestyle, nor gender.
Many of the problems we have in our country would evaporate if we insist our government obey the U.S. Constitution!
Obeying our U.S. Constitution will short-circuit a great deal of political and media arguing and
missteps simply by asking, is it in line with our U.S. Constitution, and then act accordingly.........John DeMoor
Liars to their oath of office are the biggest threat to our United States of America ~John DeMoor
If all elected officials would have obeyed their own oath of office to uphold the U.S. Constitution, there never would have been state and local officials closing down any businesses and restricting the rights of We the People.
Authority to Act or Not
Some claim state's rights, according to the 10th Amendment, which gives states authority to act in all circumstances, (on) that which is not specifically reserved to congress. However, Article 1, section 8, clause 3 of the Constitution states, Congress shall regulate commerce, which in the case of this virus panic, it did not do. In addition, because of the 14th Amendment, equal treatment in the laws, congress would only have the power to shut down all businesses or none.
The Side You're On
No matter which side of the argument you find yourself, as a result of obeying the Constitution, there never would have been the shutdown of our economy, which includes the many elective surgeries that were/have been put off, resulting in the number of deaths, calculated now, and soon into the future. I am not trying to be insensitive, BUT, there are many more people (still) dying from myriad diseases, and accidents, while we calculate Wuhan Virus infections, and deaths. *It doesn't help when some officials cite a cause of death as (Wuhan) Covid-19, when the virus was only a contributing factor in death of a patient.
A great many blame "the government" for a lot of our problems, but I insist, the fault lies with We the People for not engaging ourselves well enough to demand our representatives obey the U.S. Constitution, as they have sworn to do.
Electronic Censorship/My Opinion:
Our Freedom of the Press, electronic or not is being infringed upon, by some "private" companies, and should not be allowed. Before the Internet, the argument was made, "we just don't have the space during our broadcast and/or in our newspaper to allow everyone to comment." That argument no longer exists, and therefore the censorship of opposing views is unconstitutional. ~Johnny Counterfit (John DeMoor)
Rights verses Privileges
Over the decades, many have, and still try to water-down our Constitution, to fit their own betrayal. In a social media exchange I had regarding Constitutional rights and privileges, I offered the following:
The word, interpret is found nowhere in the Constitution. And, if you still insist on applying the word, privilege as being equal in strength to the word, rights, then I refer you to our U.S. Constitution, Article 4, section 2: "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States," which means, restrictions imposed on the rights & privileges of some are unconstitutional if those rights & privileges fully enjoyed by other States are not extended to everyone, thus making liars to their oath of office to uphold the Constitution, an anathema to our citizens.....well.....our honorable citizens.
Politicians get away with only what We the People allow ~Johnny Counterfit
Protecting Those Who Protect Us
The 14th Amendment gives all Americans equal protection of the laws, and yet it has been U.S. Supreme Court decisions, during the last four decades, allowing “Qualified Immunity” for government officials; clearly, in my opinion, unconstitutional.
~However, I do believe police, fire, and other "first responders" should be given some sort of protection against lawsuits as a result of lawfully doing their job. By utilizing the U.S. Constitution Amendment process, NOT the courts nor by legislative fiat would "Qualified Immunity" be constitutional.
Cornell Law School cites the following, on its website: Qualified immunity only applies to suits against government officials as individuals, not suits against the government for damages caused by the officials’ actions. Although qualified immunity frequently appears in cases involving police officers, it also applies to most other executive branch officials. While judges, prosecutors, legislators, and some other government officials do not receive qualified immunity, most are protected by other immunity doctrines. Qualified immunity is not immunity from having to pay money damages, but rather immunity from having to go through the costs of a trial at all. Accordingly, courts must resolve qualified immunity issues as early in a case as possible, preferably before discovery.
It appears to me qualified immunity offers the dishonest wiggle room within their behavior, i.e. no potential punishment means they can do what they want; how many politicians, officials, and bureaucrats do you suppose feel this way? Wouldn’t it be great if we took that wiggle room away from them? They would all have to obey the same laws applied to us.
We can, and we do have the power within the U.S. Constitution to take away qualified immunity by insisting our representatives in the House and Senate take action to outlaw the practice. If the Supreme Court decides to reinstate qualified immunity, then our representatives, with our insistence, can impeach any of the Supreme Court justices who voted in favor to reinstate, under Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution, to wit, The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior.
Remember, politicians, judges, officials, and bureaucrats get away with only what We the People allow!
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Legislative & Judicial Branch: Keep in mind, the oath of office words are, support and defend the Constitution of the United States...and NOT interpret the Constitution; by the way, the word interpret is found NOWHERE in the Constitution; the word, interpret should also be stricken from use in law offices and court rooms. A judge and or jury is charged with deciding if the accused broke the law or not; the word interpret should never be allowed.
Judge's Oath of Office
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his/her office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.” Nowhere are the words "interpret the law."
ATTORNEY’S OATH I, ____ do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitutions of the United States, and of this state; that I will honestly demean myself in the practice of law; that I will discharge my duties to my clients to the best of my ability; and that I will conduct myself with integrity and civility in dealing and communicating with the court and all parties. So help me God. Nowhere are the words "interpret the law."