Judical Tyrrany:The Unwritten Alternative Constitution and the Unelected Legislature

"The Constitution...is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please." -- Thomas Jefferson

One of the most powerful weapons at the ACLU's disposal is that of judicicial activism. Considering that the ACLU is an elitist organization lacking in respect to the democratic process, perhaps we shouldn't be surprised with the methods it uses to achieve its goals. But few seem to be aware of the power behind the quiet, behind-the-scenes, high profile cases filed by the ACLU. "If the ACLU is truly concerned about issues of constitutionality, it would do well to consider the patent unconstitutionality of judicial activism whereby the Court preempts Article I, Section I, granting all legislative powers to Congress-not the Court. Because of this now-common departure from constitutional mandate, the legislative and judicial branches of government have been reversed."ACLU:The Devil's Advocate

So, is the ACLU really America's Defender of Civil Rights? Well, at least the part of the Bill of Rights that it happens to agree with. I won't deny that new liberties can't be added by the people through a democratic process; only that it should not be done by the Court through it's own biased interpretation of cultural values. But that is exactly what happens in today's time.

The Founding Fathers never meant for federal courts to turn into judicial tyrannies. In fact, in 1788, Alexander Hamilton wrote that "The judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power." Most liberals, of course, claim that the courts have judicial supremacy and can overturn laws as well as impose their social agendas at will. This is a myth.

In 1819, Thomas Jefferson, who probably had a fairly good grasp of how our government was to function, said: "If this opinion [of judicial supremacy] be sound, then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de se [act of suicide]." Yet, today, the federal courts have basically become judicial tyrants, overturning laws passed by state legislatures and Congress and legislating a radical liberal agenda. This is not the proper role of judges. Their role is to interpret laws, not create them. Congress must put an end to this usurpation of power by judges." Source

Many liberals will argue that the intentions of the founding father's may not apply in "today's changing times". They argue that the founding father's had slaves, and women were not in equal standing. This argument is flawed...for ignoring the original intent in favor of causes opposite of the majority's morals, by pointing out moral flaws in our founding fathers only defeats it's own purpose. Apart from morals, there is nothing wrong with slavery. Apart from morals, nothing would be wrong. If morality is a factor that the liberals want to use, their immoral agenda would quickly be out of business. Liberalism's political agenda is no more based on morals than the evil of slavery.

I would argue that the founding father's intentions do matter. I especially like the intention that our nation's laws would be decided through a representative democracy, and not elitist judges. As a matter of fact, I would argue that most advances in civil liberties took place through either the legislative branch or the executive branch. I won't deny that the judicial branch didn't play it's part such as in Brown vs. the Board of Education, where they successfully desegregated schools, but the major victories for civil rights were enacted by the other two branches.

Let's start with racial equality. Without denying that many people struggled behind the scenes to influence the important milestones in our moral development, the major acts that made them part of American culture were enacted through the legislative and executive branches. Abraham Lincoln declared the Emancipation Proclamation, which freed the slaves from all of states who seceded. This was enacted by the executive branch.

In 1865, the U.S. Congress ratified the 13th amendment, abolishing slavery. An act of the legislative branch.

In 1868, the U.S. Congress passed the 14th amendment, granting blacks full citizenship. An act of the legislative branch.

1964, Congress passes Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibiting discrimination in public places, schools, lodging, federal programs, and employment

1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson signs the 1968 Housing Act, prohibiting discrimination in sale, rental, or lease of housing.

As you can see in the racial equality area of civil rights that the legislative and executive branches were the ones responsible for the major changes. Again, I don't deny influence from the judicial branch, but it clearly kept within the boundaries of its delegated powers of interpretation.

What of the argument of women's rights? Again, in was Congress that passed the 19th amendment.

Law or the making of law is supposed to be restricted to the legislative branches of government, the House and the Senate. Judges are supposed to keep their rulings within the bounds of law(the Constitution). They are not supposed to implement their own opinions in the course of trials. Yet they do so consistently in direct violation of their oaths, and the law. They invent words, paragraphs, and meanings that do not even exist in the Constitution.

The ACLU and liberal, renegade judges have been using the courts for the last 40 years to transform America into a Godless society. Think about the damage they have done to our Christian Heritage by banning prayer and Bible reading in public school, outlawing the Ten Commandments from public places, and telling the Boy Scouts that they can't mention God in their oath or prohibit openly homosexual Scout Masters.

And all the while, the legislative branch is not innocent. It sits aside, and does nothing to intervene.

So is this judicial tyranny a legitimate thing for America to fear? You bet it is!

Thomas Jefferson had this fear from the beginning. "The great object of my fear is the Federal Judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting with noiseless foot and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step and holding what it gains, is engulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them."Quote

"It has long been my opinion, and I have never shrunk from its expression,....that the germ of dissolution of our Federal Government is in the constitution of the Federal Judiciary--an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scarecrow), working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction until all shall be usurped from the States and the government be consolidated into one. To this I am opposed." Quote

"You seem to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy...The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal...knowing that to whatever hands confided, with corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots."Quote

Sadly the democratic process of making law through elected representatives has been trampled under foot. Instead the "Supremacist" Court has required lower courts to ignore the plain meaning of the words of the First Amendment, and fabricated an irrational understanding of those words that does the exact opposite of what the establishment clause forbids-allow the federal courts to interfere with religious expression in the States.

So what can we do to stop this? We could take the advice of a founding father, that was not adhered to in our history.

"Let the future appointments of judges be for four or six years and renewable by the President and Senate. This will bring their conduct at regular periods under revision and probation, and may keep them in equipoise between the general and special governments. We have erred in this point by copying England, where certainly it is a good thing to have the judges independent of the King. But we have omitted to copy their caution also, which makes a judge removable on the address of both legislative houses."Quote

As great as this suggestion sounds to me, I also think it would be impossible in today's times. The democrats oppose our President's Supreme Court nominees for a reason...because they know that a judge that actually stays within the bounds that the Constitution grants them, will be a stumbling block for their agenda. They know that the true focus of power in our government lies within the federal bench.

Mostly the power is in the hands of our elected officials in Congress. "Congress has the constitutional right to tell the federal courts what cases to hear and not hear. Congress can prevent the courts from banning our acknowledgment of God in the Pledge of Allegiance, the Ten Commandments, our motto, and our National Anthem. Congress should prevent judges from citing foreign law to change U.S. laws and customs. Congress can stop the abuse of letting a single federal judge overturn the votes of five million Americans in a statewide referendum. Americans should reject the notion that a 5-4 or a 4-3 decision by federal judges can become "the law of the land" and overturn centuries of American law, culture and custom. Congress should make better use of its constitutional power to impeach judges. Congress should stop the nonsense of making states, cities, counties and schools pay the attorney's fees when they file suit against Ten Commandments monuments or the Pledge of Allegiance. Thousands of school districts and local entities of government are pots of gold for the ACLU, which plans to collect attorney's fees for all its lawsuits to ban God from every public place and school".Source

Congress has the power to put a stop to this, so ask them to do so. Elect representatives with traditional morals and values. Go here for a list of questions to ask every candidate for U.S. Congress. Let your voice be heard! Here are some links to get you started.

You can join the fight against the ACLU and their ilk by becoming involved with and supporting the following organizations:
Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) - http://www.alliancedefensefund.org

Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) - http://www.thomasmore.org

American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) - http://www.aclj.org

The Rutherford Institute - http://www.rutherford.org/

Stop the ACLU Coalition - http://www.stoptheaclu.org

Here are a few examples of how two of those organizations are fighting back:

ADF Contacts Over 3,600 School Districts Over Attempts To Censor Christmas

ADF: 700 lawyers ready to fight ACLU lawsuits

ADF: Pentagons' Warning About Boyscouts Is Absurd

Thomas More Law Center: Town of Palm Beach Pays $50,000 In Attorney Fees Apologizes To Women In Nativity Lawsuit

Additional information:

The ACLU must be destroyed: Joseph Farah supports Boy Scouts, urges Americans to fight back

Citizens mobilized to stop ACLU (seeks to consign group to 'ash heap of history')

ACLU fulfilling communist agenda

Revealing FACTS on the ACLU from its own writings

See how YOUR Senator or Representative ranks with the ACLU
This group just started on December 3, 2004 and are looking for new members to their yahoo group

My Personal Anti-ACLU Blog (Check it out and leave a comment!)

Let me know if you would like to join my ACLU Ping List!

ACLU's Tyrannical forces behave like Nazi stormtroopers. Excerpt from 3-21-05 article at http://www.washtimes.com:

ACLU to keep tabs on protest
By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The American Civil Liberties Union has warned the 950 volunteers expected to take part next month in an Arizona border vigil against illegal immigration that it is assigning monitors to ensure none of the aliens are abused.
The warning came in the wake of meetings last week by five senators from Mexico's three political parties, who voiced their concerns to Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton, state legislators, civic leaders and the Arizona Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

**THE ACLU WARNS PROTESTING AMERICAN CITIZENS!!!
ACLU "monitors" and "keeps tabs on" AMERICAN CITIZENS???

The ACLU acts like the rising Nazi party did in the 1920's. In effect, the ACLU is a neoMarxist political party dedicated to subverting and overthrowing America's republic foundations.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.