Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Oklahoma Sharia Ban
The American Thinker ^ | November 20, 2010 | Todd Keister

Posted on 11/20/2010 1:35:02 AM PST by Scanian

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last
To: ComputerGuy

When are the states going to learn that a federal judge does not have jurisdiction over a sovereign state? Only the Supreme Court has that jurisdiction. The governor of Oklahoma needs to ignore the ruling of the federal judge just as Gov Brewer in Arizona should. If they want to sue then take it to SCOTUS. These federal judges are out of control.


21 posted on 11/20/2010 10:20:34 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2
I don't think the good citizens of Oklahoma should simply ignore the ruling. I'd like to see them saying hell no while giving that AA 'judge' the middle finger.
22 posted on 11/20/2010 11:13:05 AM PST by ComputerGuy (HM2/USN M/3/3 Marines RVN 66-67)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2

“When are the states going to learn that a federal judge does not have jurisdiction over a sovereign state? Only the Supreme Court has that jurisdiction.”

Sense when? If the U.S. Supreme court has jurisdiction over States then so does it’s inferior courts by delegations.

The flaw of the Constitution in place as apposes to the written Constitution authorized by the people(in their capacity as States) is the presumption that the actors defined and limited by that constitution have the final authority to judge the meaning of that constitution.

As Thomas Jefferson said such a power is the heights of madness rendering any such government who’s officers hold such power effectively lawless given that they are subject only to the limits of their own discretion not the limits of any written Constitutional law.

So to be frank, the constitution now in place is not a constitution at all.

In a Constitution the States being the ratifiers of the contract are the final Judge of their own written consent to be governed.

The plain English of the Constitution was written to make this judgment easy with respect to the limits of their capacity.

There should be no intrastate conflict with the Federal Government for the simple reason the Federal Government has almost no legitimate intRAstate powers to speak of.

IntERstate conflicts involve legitimate disputes between 2 or more states, in which case the Federal government has the power to arbitrate, and enforce its judgment by simply siding with one of the parties.


23 posted on 11/22/2010 8:14:51 PM PST by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson