- Messages
- 736
- Reactions
- 575
In 2012, National Federation of Independent Business vs Sebelius was considered by many to be one of the most significant Supreme Court cases heard in decades. On its outcome would depend the continued liberty of the American people. For if our elected officials can force the public to purchase government-approved health insurance, what can they NOT demand the American people acquire?! The full effects of the unconscionable betrayal of the Constitution and the American public by Chief Justice John Roberts are only beginning to be realized.
If the NFIB decision pronounced an end to our liberty, the Courts upcoming ruling in Bond vs U.S. has the potential to literally end the 240 year history of the United States. For at issue in this case is the following question: When the United States joins an international treaty, may Congress pass laws toward its implementation that violate the Constitution? The Obama Regime, through Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, says YES. For during oral arguments on November 5th, Verrilli told the Court that once a treaty is signed by the president and ratified by the Senate, Congress has the power to pass any law necessary and proper to implement the treaty. ANY law! The constitutional limits on Congressional power may be ignored at the whim of lawmakers.
As a result, the United Nations would effectively make the laws by which the American people are governed. The UN Small Arms Treaty would, for example, wipe out the 2nd Amendment as international police acquire authority to ordereven carry outthe disarming of the American people.
The Bill of Rights will become the former law of the land. Express an opinion insulting to pro-Islamic UN doctrine, and an American citizen could be imprisoned (or, should the terms of a treaty call for it, perhaps even be beheaded as an infidel!)
The legal history of Bond is a bit involved and not really at issue here. What is of importance is the fact that the terms of a treaty entered into by the president and ratified by the Senate will effectively take precedence over the Constitution. For elected DC representatives may fashion and pass legislation based solely upon upholding the terms of any treaty with any nation for any purpose.
Imagine a United States in which parents have no right to raise their children except according to accepted, international doctrine; wealth would be subject to fair and equitable forced re-distribution; expression of unacceptable opinions would expose a speaker to fine or imprisonment; and everywhere, informers would gain favor with the powers that be by betraying freedom loving neighbors or family members for a carelessly expressed desire for liberty.
A ruling on Bond vs U.S. is expected before the end of the Courts term next summer. John Roberts has already betrayed the American people by ignoring the Constitution in his decision on the Affordable Care Act. Will this corrupt and cowardly justice now participate in a majority ruling that would put that document to death?
Read more at <broken link removed>
If the NFIB decision pronounced an end to our liberty, the Courts upcoming ruling in Bond vs U.S. has the potential to literally end the 240 year history of the United States. For at issue in this case is the following question: When the United States joins an international treaty, may Congress pass laws toward its implementation that violate the Constitution? The Obama Regime, through Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, says YES. For during oral arguments on November 5th, Verrilli told the Court that once a treaty is signed by the president and ratified by the Senate, Congress has the power to pass any law necessary and proper to implement the treaty. ANY law! The constitutional limits on Congressional power may be ignored at the whim of lawmakers.
As a result, the United Nations would effectively make the laws by which the American people are governed. The UN Small Arms Treaty would, for example, wipe out the 2nd Amendment as international police acquire authority to ordereven carry outthe disarming of the American people.
The Bill of Rights will become the former law of the land. Express an opinion insulting to pro-Islamic UN doctrine, and an American citizen could be imprisoned (or, should the terms of a treaty call for it, perhaps even be beheaded as an infidel!)
The legal history of Bond is a bit involved and not really at issue here. What is of importance is the fact that the terms of a treaty entered into by the president and ratified by the Senate will effectively take precedence over the Constitution. For elected DC representatives may fashion and pass legislation based solely upon upholding the terms of any treaty with any nation for any purpose.
Imagine a United States in which parents have no right to raise their children except according to accepted, international doctrine; wealth would be subject to fair and equitable forced re-distribution; expression of unacceptable opinions would expose a speaker to fine or imprisonment; and everywhere, informers would gain favor with the powers that be by betraying freedom loving neighbors or family members for a carelessly expressed desire for liberty.
A ruling on Bond vs U.S. is expected before the end of the Courts term next summer. John Roberts has already betrayed the American people by ignoring the Constitution in his decision on the Affordable Care Act. Will this corrupt and cowardly justice now participate in a majority ruling that would put that document to death?
Read more at <broken link removed>
