The Law

00Publius Contributor - Anti-Americanism - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - GOP - Judges - Media Bias - News - President - Socialism - Society/Culture - Taxes - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Boston Paper: John McCain Will be a Dictator?

October 25, 2008 by 1 Comment

By- Warner Todd Huston

Someone at The Phoenix, a small Boston weekly, is off his medication. It’s hard to believe sanity is a familiar state, at least, when reviewing the silliness passed off as serious political analysis, anyway. For the lead editorial in The Phoenix this week is a fantastic display of hyperbole filled with “truther” propensities. The editorial, you see, is all worried that John McCain will make himself a “dictator” if he wins the election next month. No, they are serious, so quit laughing.

And how is it that he will become a “dictator”? Why, it’s because he will be able to appoint a new Supreme Court Justice, you see. Yes, that is the only proof posited for this idiotic theory.

The “argument” this editorial pushes on an unsuspecting reader is that if McCain appoints another eeeevil conservative Justice, then the Courts will turn over all the power in the land to the president. After that, I suppose the writer of this schlock posing as analysis imagines that the rest of the government will just turn off the lights and go home, or something.

Continue reading “Boston Paper: John McCain Will be a Dictator?”

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

It’s TREASON, I Tell You!

October 20, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Treason! The word is thrown about quite a lot lately. Unfortunately, it is almost always hyperbole.

Oh, Americans think they know what treason is, but when you get right down to it, few really do — at least in an American legal context, anyway.

Webster’s defines traitor as one who betrays another’s trust or is false to an obligation or duty, one who commits treason. Treason is defined as the betrayal of a trust, or the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family.

That’s all well and good and on a purely definitional level, that certainly is treasonous behavior. But U.S. law does not work purely on Webster’s definition. In fact, U.S. law has quite a specific meaning to treason and it’s one that makes a true, legal charge of treason quite hard to prove and harder to prosecute.

Continue reading “It’s TREASON, I Tell You!”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - The Law - Unions - Warner Todd Huston

OLMS Institutes New Union Reporting Rules for Hidden Slush Funds

October 9, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

The Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) has issued new reporting procedures for unions to report the details of what are called T-1 Trusts. These new reporting efforts should help bring light to these funds that have heretofore been shielded from transparency allowing unions to use many millions of dollars without accountability from its members or the government.

A T-1 Trust fund is a nice bit of accounting sleight of hand that unions have used to fund what they claim is “retraining” of its members. But, millions of dollars end up in these funds and there are no rules to account for where this money goes or how it is being used. Rumors abound that, instead of “retraining,” this money goes into the pockets of union officials as “fees” and “salaries” to union bosses to “administer” the accounts.

There have been past reports that these funds have been used to sponsor NASCAR events and have gone into the pockets of political candidates, but the truth is, no one is really sure where it all goes. After all, there are NO rules for reporting what these funds are used for.

The government wants to shed light on these funds.

“This final rule builds on the administration’s commitment to transparency and accountability for corporations, pension funds and labor unions. Union members expect access to relevant and useful information in order to make fundamental investment, career and retirement decisions, evaluate options and exercise legally guaranteed rights,” said Don Todd, deputy assistant secretary for labor-management programs. “With meaningful disclosure, the department hopes to deter potential misuse of union trusts that have occurred in the past and allow union members to know exactly where their hard-earned dollars are being spent.”

Look for this to be either ignored by unions or actually repealed by Congress once the union bought and paid for Barack Obama gets into office.

Continue reading “OLMS Institutes New Union Reporting Rules for Hidden Slush Funds”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Media Bias - News - Socialism - Society/Culture - The Law - Unions - Warner Todd Huston

Colorado Amendments 47,49,54 Attacked by Unions

September 28, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

There has been a pretty vicious fight in Colorado over several Amendments that will appear on the ballots aimed at putting a collar on rampant union violations of worker’s rights this year. The unions have imported all sorts of outside groups and money to defeat these worker freedom Amendments.

Here is a page from the latest anti-worker rights the unions have sent out.

Continue reading “Colorado Amendments 47,49,54 Attacked by Unions”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - Judges - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Unreported: Montana Governor’s ‘Senior Counsel’ Not Licensed to Practice Law in State! (Democrat, of Course)

September 3, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

There is an ethics squabble going on in Montana perpetrated by the senior counsel to the Democrat Governor of Montana, Brian Schweitzer. It has been revealed that the Governor’s “senior counsel,” a man named Eric Stern, has been caught trying to “back-door” the judge in a case in which he is involved on behalf of Governor Schweitzer. The ethics violation is bad enough, but it has also been discovered that, even though he is claimed to be an attorney and the Governor’s senior counsel, Eric Stern, is not licensed to practice law in the state of Montana. This seems to say that Eric Stern is practicing law without a license, doesn

00Publius Contributor - Inernet - Media Bias - News - The Heritage Foundation - The Law

Important FEC Ruling for Blogger Freedom…

August 15, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Apparently the FEC just made a good ruling for our side. The Heritage Foundation has the report…

Blogger Freedom Reaffirmed

Bloggers and web site operators may support, oppose, link to, and work cooperatively with federal political candidates. This freedom was reaffirmed when the newly re-constituted Federal Election Commission released its first two enforcement cases August 12.

The Commission’s refusal to regulate blogging and internet sites is not new, but it is notable is that the pro-blogger decision was made within a week or two of the new Commission taking office. Of the scores of items on its docket, the new Commission chose to address this one first: quite likely because they wanted to send a signal to that bloggers are free to engage in politics

Specifically, the Commission said that Gordon Fischer, a former state political party chairman, did not violate election law when he maintained a web site and blog (Iowa True Blue) promoting Barack Obama and criticizing Hillary Clinton. (Our friends at CCP note that the complaint was filed by a Clinton supporter: observing that all too many FEC complaints are filed for political harassment
Continue reading “Important FEC Ruling for Blogger Freedom…”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Welcome to My Blog, Please See My Lawyer to Post Here

July 17, 2008 by 1 Comment

-By Warner Todd Huston

What is the ages old misconstruction of Shakespeare? “First kill all the lawyers.” Well, one might excuse bloggers if they might wish to add the officers of the courts to that death sentence, at least if the experience of the bloggers at New York’s “Room 8” blog are concerned.

For Ben Smith and his fellow “Room 8” bloggers, the world got a bit topsy-turvey not long ago when he was served with a grand jury subpoena by state prosecutors demanding that the identities of anonymous posters on his website be revealed.

Worse, the court wouldn’t inform Mr. Smith exactly why they wanted the identities of several posters and what they would do with the information once they got it.

Smith’s subpoena got retracted and the identities weren’t needed after some legal wrangling, but incidents like this are beginning to occur more and more. Bloggers are running up against the law with increasing frequency in the US and the world. Of course, for much of the world’s bloggers, their blogging is landing them in jail to be tortured by oppressive regimes like China and the like, but bloggers are also finding their work under question in the free world, too.

It’s still the wild west as far as the law is concerned with blogging. Blogs haven’t been around long enough for the law to have settled on what to do with them, what rights bloggers have or don’t have, and what they can or cannot do. The status blogs have in the eyes of the law is still incredibly amorphous. Are bloggers journalists? Should they get the same protections as newspapers? Are they entirely private communications? Should they be held to exactly the same libel laws as other media? And, where do anonymous bloggers stand? Should they be forced to reveal their identities? How about commenters on blogs? Should they be forced to publicly declare their identities? Is their privacy somehow perfectly secure?

Continue reading “Welcome to My Blog, Please See My Lawyer to Post Here”

00Publius Contributor - Congress - Constitution - Education - Founders - News - Patriotism - President - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law

Did Baptists Influence Thomas Jefferson?

July 11, 2008 by

-By Don Boys, Ph.D.

Baptist people have been the most principled people since the time of Christ. I do not believe that the designation of “Baptist” is nearly as important as the doctrine, but I want people to know where I stand. I am a Baptist, and am proud of my heritage that has made an incredible impact on this world—even Jefferson and the U.S. Constitution!

Baptists have stood for the free exercise of a person’s will and against oppression (religious or political) down through the ages.

The English historian, Skeats wrote, “It is the singular and distinguished honor of the Baptists to have repudiated from their earliest history all coercive power over the consciences and actions of men with reference to religion. They were the proto-evangelists of the voluntary principle.”

While that is true, it is also true that there have always been people, since the time of Christ, who held Baptist principles. In fact, a Methodist historian, John Clark Ridpath, who died in 1900 wrote, “I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist Church as far back as 100 A.D., although without doubt there were Baptist Churches then, as all Christians were then Baptists.” (Emphasis added.)
Continue reading “Did Baptists Influence Thomas Jefferson?”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - President - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Reuters: Accuses US of Being Against the Rule of Law

July 6, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

It looks like Reuters is trying to say that the United States stands against the rule of law with their latest piece on a recent ruling from the so-called World Court — the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ wants the U.S. to vacate the death penalty sentences of several Mexican nationals that sit on death row in prisons in several states and Reuters is shaking its finger at the nasty Americans that deny the jurisdiction of the self-styled World Court.

Mexico has been agitating with the World Court to force the United States to vacate (or at least revisit) the convictions of 51 Mexican nationals now on death row because they claim that these murderers were not alerted to their right to seek consular assistance before they went into the American court systems.

Naturally, the ICJ happily complied with Mexico’s request and demanded that the U.S. comply with the World Court decision. Bush made an unfortunate decision in 2005 to ask the various states to comply with the ICJ, but the issue has since been settled by the Supreme Court of the United States. Fortunately, just this month the SCOTUS said that our courts are not bound by the ICJ rulings.

Of course, Reuters seems to imagine that the U.S. now stands against the rule of law because we have told the ICJ to take a hike. The Reuters report is filled with the stern scolding of a U.S. that “violated” international law and how the U.S. is “in breach of its international obligations.”

Continue reading “Reuters: Accuses US of Being Against the Rule of Law”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Gov’t To tell You What Kids to Invite to Birthday Parties

June 30, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

OK, now go read that headline again. There is no trick to it. I am saying that government is aggregating unto itself the power to tell you, a parent of an 8-year-old child, which of his school classmates he is allowed to invite to his birthday party. And government has decided that if your child doesn’t invite every kid in his class, then he isn’t allowed to invite any of them.

It’s about discrimination, don’t you know?

You see, our wilting flowers, our fragile, unable, emotionally unstable children will grow up to become serial killers if they don’t get invited to YOUR child’s birthday party. The government cares, see, and has so decreed. YOU will just have to invite everyone or you will be barred from having that party.

Fortunately this stupidity hasn’t yet happened in the United States but it did just occur in Europe. Sweden to be exact. The AP is reporting the Nanny State in Sweden has forcibly taken away the birthday invitations to an 8-year-old boy’s birthday party and told his father that he isn’t allowed to pass them out to only some of the other kids. If it isn’t all of them, then NONE should be invited.

The boy handed out invitations to classmates at his school in Lund, southern Sweden, but did not invite two boys because they were not his friends… The school, 360 miles south of Stockholm, confiscated all the invitations, saying it objected because it had a duty to ensure against discrimination.

The Father of the boy told authorities that one of the two boys had bullied his child and the other had not invited his boy to a past party.

Now, the anti-American left in this country would have you believe that Europe is the closest thing to nirvana, they say we should be emulating what they do there. We’ve even had self-hating Supreme Court Justices imagining that we should jettison the Constitution and take up foreign precedent as our own.

Big Brother and his nanny state rules all, even your 8-year-old’s birthday party.

Don’t laugh this off as something that could not happen here. Total domination of government over our lives is the ultimate end of modern liberalism. From the most important decisions to the least, most personal decisions, government must take all power unto itself to fulfill the liberal mantras of “fairness,” and “non-discrimination.”

It is already happening in Europe. It will come here if the Democratic Party and their malcontent, meddlesome constituency have anything to say about it. It’s just the kind of “change” just the kind of “new tone” they want. In fact, even if that isn’t their ultimate plan, it IS the ultimate destination, regardless.

Continue reading “Gov’t To tell You What Kids to Invite to Birthday Parties”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Chgo Sun-Times Takes Stand Against The Constitution

June 29, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

With more fallout from the Supreme Court’s latest 2nd Amendment ruling, the Chicago Sun-Times has published an op ed wagging a finger at the Supremes saying that the Heller decision will be a “tax on Chicago citizens,” and that it is a tax to be “paid in blood and money.” The Times scolds the Court with all sorts of dire warnings and worries that blood will flow in the city but, as with D.C., the violence in Chicago with its extreme gun ban often causes the city to top the lists of the most violent cities in America. So, why the Sun-Times imagines the current 25-year-old gun ban is worth keeping is anyone’s guess.

The Sun-Times, though, is filled with woe at the Heller decision and offers the downright stupid solution of more gun banning despite the singular fact that their “solution” has miserably failed in every city it has been tried — including the very one they claim to care about. Not to mention that the Times seems to have no clue about the Constitution nor any respect for the citizenry of that same city.

Thursday’s landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision gutting a Washington, D.C., handgun ban can best be viewed, from Chicago’s perspective, as a tax on Chicago citizens… A tax to be paid in blood and money.

Oh, the gnashing of teeth.

Because of the court’s ruling, Chicago residents, in the not too distant future, likely will be able to buy handguns and keep them in their homes for the first time in more than 25 years… That new freedom will come at a high cost for our citizens.

First of all Sun-Times, the Second Amendment is not a “new freedom.” It is well over a 200 year-old “freedom.” No, not even a freedom but a right bestowed upon us by God and not in your power to remove.

Continue reading “Chgo Sun-Times Takes Stand Against The Constitution”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Islam - Islamofascism - Judges - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Supreme Court Creates Killing

June 12, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

In a 5 to 4 decision, the idiots on the Supreme Court have decided that terrorists are covered by our Constitution, no matter where they are captured and held.

This is as wrong headed a decision as can be imagined and two of the Justices, Scalia and Roberts, were scathing in their dissent.

But, here is the real result of this ruling. No, it doesn’t “help” the murderers and terrorists get habeas corpus, or find rights, it will kill them on the battlefield. What battlefield commander will waste his time trying to figure out what rights the terrorist he is facing has or doesn’t have?

The proper and reasonable decision to make on the battlefield will be to automatically kill EVERY captured person as soon as you do a quick interrogation. After all, anything else will simply just get the commanders on the line in trouble with the “law.”

And, I cannot say I’d blame any American soldier on the battlefield. Just kill every one of those captured without regard for their status. Their innocence? Immaterial. Kill them anyway.

This is what the dolts on the SCOTUS have wrought.

So, here’s hoping that more of these people are merely executed on the field and left for dead instead of brought into custody, introduced to American rights, and then released into OUR country as they await their undeserved day in court. As they are let go HERE in THIS country while those who would assist them to destroy this country pretends to get them their day in court, they then will have access to THIS country where they can wreck their terrorist agenda.
Continue reading “Supreme Court Creates Killing”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Miami Herald: 2nd Amendment is ‘Mythical Right ‘

June 10, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

The Miami (FL) Herald let lose with another propagandistic broadside against the 2nd Amendment on Thursday featuring some more moaning and false statements about how horrible it is for America that the misnamed “assault weapons ban” has lapsed. There is much wringing of hands, waterworks, histrionics and over dramatics by the aptly named Fred Grimm here. In “What’s a few dead cops to the gun lobby?” Grimm’s final pronouncement is that the 2nd Amendment is a “mythical right” but in between there are many misstatements and out right lies.

Grimm starts out putting on some faux “shock” that a modern “semiautomatic assault rifle” he had the occasion to handle was so light. “The shock was in the weight of the thing. Less than six pounds,” Grimm writes. And, what exactly does this mean? A butcher knife weighs less then a pound and can kill, too. What does weight have to do with anything?

Then the scare tactics:

Continue reading “Miami Herald: 2nd Amendment is ‘Mythical Right ‘”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

CNN’s Jeffery Toobin Says Past Liberals on Supreme Court are ‘Surprisingly Moderate’

June 5, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

If we needed more proof that CNN’s legal analyst, Jeffery Toobin, is one of the most disingenuous legal minds of our day, the Saginaw News helped us out with that quest. Toobin made an appearance at a Midland, MI event this week where, among other comments, he ridiculously claimed that the left leaning Justices that sit on the Supreme Court are “surprisingly moderate.”

We will remember one of Toobin’s other recent absurdities when he claimed that the GOP likes voter I.D. laws because they “stop Democrats from voting,” despite the fact that all evidence shows that requiring an I.D. has not stopped anyone from voting.

In his remarks in Michigan, Toobin predicted that Barack Obama will eventually become a Supreme Court Justice because the Court “needs that kind of person, that kind of mind.”

One might wonder if the “kind of mind” Toobin means is the kind that would say that Americans who support the Second Amendment and are religious are “bitter”? If THAT kind of mind is something the SCOTUS needs, obviously the Constitution isn’t important to Toobin!

Toobin also tried to raise fears in the audience that if John McCain became president he’d try to fill the court with right-wing fanatics.

He pointed to a little-covered May 6 speech by GOP presidential candidate John McCain, one spoken in code, that indicates McCain will accelerate the court’s conservative bent that the current President Bush began.

What Toobin disingenuously didn’t mention to his audience was the fact that if McCain becomes president, he will have a solidly Democrat controlled Congress (both Houses) and he will not have the power to seat Constructionist or conservative judges.

Continue reading “CNN’s Jeffery Toobin Says Past Liberals on Supreme Court are ‘Surprisingly Moderate’”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Family - Health - Media Bias - Morals/Sex - News - Religion - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Sexualizing Little Girls is Art?

June 2, 2008 by 2 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

What would you say about photos of naked children — most of them girls as young as 13 — holding each other or by themselves in pensive poses? Would you imagine it to be thoughtful art or would your first thought be that it seemed like uncomfortable porn? Would you think it just a beautiful expression of humanity, or would you get a vague feeling that someone is getting his jollies from these pictures and it might be the so-called artist. And would it seem like a celebration or exploitation of children?

This is the argument currently going on in Australia over an art gallery showing of the work of photographer Bill Henson. Henson’s latest photo series shows several naked girls and boys, some prepubescent, in what some may consider alluring poses (though others might consider them merely thoughtful). The authorities were not amused by the exploitative photos and had them removed from the gallery. Even Australia’s new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, has had his say about this incident describing the photos as “revolting.” He later added that he will not apologize for his comments.

Naturally, several in Australia’s arts community raced to Henson’s defense saying that it is an outrage to have had the gallery showing boxed by authorities. Even actress Cate Blanchett — herself a mother of three — has voiced support of the photographer.

The letter of support scolds all those who are offended by the photos.

Continue reading “Sexualizing Little Girls is Art?”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Founders - History - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Paper: I Know, Let’s Compromise Our Rights Away!

June 1, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Columnist Tom Eblen of the Lexington, Kentucky Herald-Leader has proven to the world that he doesn’t know what a “right” is. He thinks it is something that you can “compromise” over. He thinks it is something that can be endlessly tinkered with. He seems not to realize that a “right” is something that is supposed to be insoluble, unchangeable, permanent. Worse, he has equated an American right to the horse raising industry as if the business decisions made by a handful of ranchers is somehow comparable to the observance and maintenance of our rights. Ridiculously he says that if we don’t compromise this one right, our 2nd Amendment right, it will be taken away. And hypocritically, after using fear to urge us to compromise, he accuses those of us interested in safeguarding the 2nd Amendment of using “fear” tactics.

This latest op ed, “NRA’s slippery slope full of holes,” was the result of some flack he took for touting the existence of a small gun owner’s organization that many NRA members claim is a front group for an anti-gun group. He wrote admiringly about this small group and was assailed by emails and messages informing him that he was giving support to a stealth gun grabbing group and, instead of checking out the group more thoroughly, these emails seemed to set Eblen off. Typical of a self-righteous denizen of the media, instead of finding out if the complaint letters were right and reassessing his original support, Eblen merely lashed out at 2nd Amendment supporters who alerted him to his mistake. (In fact, Eblen doesn’t even bother to try to find out more about the small gun group he wrote about before merely blowing off his obligation to be informed about what he writes.)

So, off Eblen goes wagging his finger at 2nd Amendment supporters telling them that their “hard-line views” and their use of “fear” to sell gun rights is the wrong track to take. He particularly focuses on the fear aspect, claiming that this is an illegitimate way to advocate for our rights. But, even as he claims the NRA illegitimately uses “fear” he uses fear himself to claim that if we don’t compromise our rights away we will lose all of them.

Continue reading “Paper: I Know, Let’s Compromise Our Rights Away!”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Thomas Brewton

Unwritten Constitution Under Assault

May 30, 2008 by

-By Thomas E. Brewton

In the United States and Great Britain, immigration abetted by multiculturalism is corrupting society’s unwritten constitution, which is the positive embodiment of the spirit that animates a society and gives it a driving force of unity in belief and national aims.

No society can survive without a consensus about right and wrong, about what constitutes moral conduct. That consensus is the unwritten constitution of society, the content that gives meaning to a written constitution, the meat on the bones of the structure of government.

Without that consensus there can be only a disparate group of people with little or no attachment to their new homes. That is what we see increasingly, here and in Great Britain, under the impact of a tsunami of immigration from alien cultures and religions.

Combining this huge flood of immigration with a liberal-progressive ethos of rootless multiculturalism sets the stage for disintegration of American and British societies more effectively than terrorist attacks by Islamic jihadists. No longer is education viewed as a melting pot to teach our history and the principles of our government.
Continue reading “Unwritten Constitution Under Assault”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Professor Sues Students For Doubting Hairbrained ‘Theories’

May 16, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

She claims that her students violated her civil rights. She says student’s “anti-intellectualism” made her life a living hell. So, this ex-Dartmouth professor is threatening to sue her students for the temerity to have doubted her hairbrained theories on “ecofeminism” and the “French narrative theory.”

Oh, professor Priya Venkatesan was all in high dudgeon that students would dare question her efforts to “problematize” science all right. She was all discombobulated that her students were “irrational,” and “subversive” with their questions. She even thought them filled with “fascist demagoguery” — after all, isn’t it “fascist” to ask questions and not t just swallow whole what a professor dishes out? Why, it was so horrible for her that she felt she had to consult a physician for her symptoms of “intellectual distress.”

Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal has some more of the details.

Priya Venkatesan taught English at Dartmouth College. She maintains that some of her students were so unreceptive of “French narrative theory” that it amounted to a hostile working environment. She is also readying lawsuits against her superiors, who she says papered over the harassment, as well as a confessional exposé, which she promises will “name names.”

Ms. Venkatesan lectured in freshman composition, intended to introduce undergraduates to the rigors of expository argument. “My students were very bully-ish, very aggressive, and very disrespectful,” she told Tyler Brace of the Dartmouth Review. “They’d argue with your ideas.” This caused “subversiveness,” a principle English professors usually favor.

If it’s “subversiveness” to challenge a theory, then what exactly is college for? But, Venkatesan was having none of that silly exchange of ideas stuff.

After a winter of discontent, the snapping point came while Ms. Venkatesan was lecturing on “ecofeminism,” which holds, in part, that scientific advancements benefit the patriarchy but leave women out. One student took issue, and reasonably so – actually, empirically so. But “these weren’t thoughtful statements,” Ms. Venkatesan protests. “They were irrational.” The class thought otherwise. Following what she calls the student’s “diatribe,” several of his classmates applauded.

Ms. Venkatesan informed her pupils that their behavior was “fascist demagoguery.” Then, after consulting a physician about “intellectual distress,” she canceled classes for a week. Thus the pending litigation.

But, I have to say that we really cannot blame Ms. Venkatesan. After all, this is where our institutions of higher “learning” are headed. Venkatesan can certainly be excused for imagining that such off the wall theories as feminist “thought” et al are to be accepted as gospel, never to be questioned. This is the atmosphere we have engendered in our so-called universities. Out with the old (white men) and in with the new (gender based) truths is the ticket for the learned these days.

Continue reading “Professor Sues Students For Doubting Hairbrained ‘Theories’”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Education - Immigration/Immigrants - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

San Fran Chronicle Spreads False Immigration Raids Story

May 7, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

The San Francisco Chronicle and the various demagogue politicians of Berkeley and Oakland, California should really be ashamed of themselves for ginning up into sensational “raids” a few arrests by ICE agents and making of them actions designed to empty those community’s schools of children. In reality a few routine U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in those cities occurred yesterday that had nothing to do with school children. Yet, these politicians shamelessly ran about the countryside waving their arms, serving grave warnings to ICE about their supposed targeting of school children, and ginning up parents with the false bravado of standing athwart ICE’s “harassment and fear.” But, with all the running about like Chicken Little claiming the ICE is falling, no raids either occurred or were even planned. To top it off, the San Francisco Chronicle reports the incident as the “fear across the communities” being “real” instead of correctly noting that these pandering pols in office made much ado about nothing just to inflate their own importance.

Apparently ICE made a few arrests at some homes in Berkeley and Oakland and that somehow sent a “wave of panic among parents” who were fooled into believing that ICE officers were about to raid all the schools in the area to snap up illegals for deportation.

The SFChron reports that “U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers were in both cities Tuesday, performing routine fugitive operations,” and that “officers arrested four family members at a Berkeley home and a woman at an Oakland residence.” Helpfully, the Chronicle lets us know that “they were not at schools.”

Virginia Kice, a spokesman for ICE, said that these operations happen nearly everyday, they are that common, and that there has never been any plan to raid a school. She informed the Chronicle that, “a school is not a place we would routinely conduct an enforcement operation for a variety of reasons.”

But this reality, this checkable fact of ICE operations, wasn’t going to stop Berkeley and Oakland’s pandering politicians from making political hay out of thin air, no siree.

Continue reading “San Fran Chronicle Spreads False Immigration Raids Story”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Economy/Finances - Islam - Islamofascism - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Islamic Shari’ah Banking, Is It Invading America?

April 28, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

The Daily Record in Baltimore, Maryland recently published a story by Brendan Kearney that oddly seems to present a conflict between a bank employing Islamic Shari’ah law with its American investments and some black American borrowers and painting it as a racist issue. Sadly, the real story, that of Islamic law being imposed on American investors, is sidelined in order to pursue the race card. (Full story reprinted at BlackEnterprise.com)

As The Record reports, a black couple in Baltimore — I identify their race because it is pivotal to how The Daily Record reports the story — had contracted with the Church’s Chicken restaurant chain to open a new outlet in Baltimore. Unfortunately for the entrepreneurial couple, as they were investing in their chicken outlet, Church’s Chicken was purchased by Crescent Capital Investments Inc., the US affiliate of the Bahrain-based First Islamic Investment Bank BSC. And, upon the restaurant chain’s purchase, these new Islamic corporate owners decided to institute Shari’ah laws upon their investments.

This caught the Beasleys new restaurant in a tough spot because pork products were on the morning breakfast menu for the Church’s Chicken chain. Because Shari’ah law principles had been imposed on the Beasleys’ new restaurant, they would be barred from serving their breakfast menu items, their corporate owners informed them. This barring from being able to serve their breakfast items, the couple maintains, contributed to the restaurant’s failure and their eventual bankruptcy.

Where the racism charge comes in is that older Church’s Chicken establishments, stores already open and operating, were grandfathered in and allowed to continue serving the pork food products. The new corporate masters decided that only new establishments would be barred from serving pork. As it happens, all the previous chicken restaurants in the area were owned by white people or people of other ethnicities besides black. As a result, the Beasleys imagined that the reason they were being prevented from selling the pork items on their menu was because of their race.

Continue reading “Islamic Shari’ah Banking, Is It Invading America?”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - News - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Mich. House Speaker Hires Felon to Oppose Citizen Petitioners

April 26, 2008 by 2 Comments

-By Warner Todd Huston

The campaign to raise enough signatures on petitions to recall Michigan’s Speaker of the House is taking another turn for the worse. The fight to toss the Speaker out has been pretty vicious but so far all those bad turns have been perpetrated by Andy Dillon, the Democrat in office, and none of them by the citizen groups trying to launch the recall effort. (See here and here.)

This time, the citizen groups trying to oust the Speaker are crying foul over the fact that Speaker Andy Dillon hired a convicted felon to interfere with petition carriers and to dissuade citizens from signing those petitions in Redford Township.

Party spokeswoman Liz Kerr acknowledged that Marcel L. Mitchell — who has been convicted eight times of armed robbery, gun charges and other offenses since 1990 — was hired to inform residents about the Redford Township lawmaker’s voting record. She said there’s nothing illegal about hiring Mitchell, who got out of prison last year and is on parole.

But critics say that hiring a violent felon to “inform residents” about Dillon’s voting record is an obvious attempt to threaten voters into not signing the petitions.

Continue reading “Mich. House Speaker Hires Felon to Oppose Citizen Petitioners”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

ABC News: Mexican Drug Violence U.S. Constitution’s Fault

April 23, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

True to the liberal penchant for blaming every ill in the world on the USA, ABC News has produced a “report” claiming that the increasing number of guns and drug cartel violence in Mexico is all the fault of… the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That’s right, it isn’t the drug dealers and killers in Mexico that are at fault, it’s James Madison and the Founding Father’s fault! Now, before you imagine that I am employing hyperbole in my introduction, just look at the title of their piece: “U.S. Guns Arming Mexican Drug Gangs; Second Amendment to Blame?”

ABC wrote that “U.S. gun stores and gun shows are the source of more than 90 percent of the weapons being used by Mexico’s ruthless drug cartels,” but then noted that “It’s virtually impossible to buy a firearm in Mexico as a private citizen.” To anyone really thinking about it, this fact sort of confirms the pro-gun bromide that “if you make owning a gun a crime, only criminals will have guns,” doesn’t it?

Regardless, ABC allows the Mexican attorney general to present Mexican criminality as the fault of the U.S. Constitution.

Mexico’s strict gun laws are being subverted by the easy availability of weapons in the U.S., the Mexican attorney general, Eduardo Medina-Mora Icaza, told ABC News. “The Second Amendment,” said the attorney general, “is certainly not designed to arm and give fire power to organized crime abroad.”

If that same Mexican government wasn’t so rife with corruption, weakness and crime, our laws here wouldn’t be such a problem for them there. Here is the thing, if Mexicans had the same God-given right to self-defense as Americans, all their guns would be purchased right at home. But, Constitutional right or no, the same violence would be happening in Mexico as the violence is not the fault of gun laws. It is the fault of Mexican corruption and drugs.

Further, the Mexican drug cartels are powerful and flush with money. If they really wanted guns and the USA didn’t offer an easy mark to obtain them, they’d merely go elsewhere. Certainly we should try harder to assure that our Constitutional rights don’t interfere with the laws of a neighboring nation, but to assume we are the sole cause of their ills is poppycock.

Continue reading “ABC News: Mexican Drug Violence U.S. Constitution’s Fault”

00Publius Contributor - Budget - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Taxes - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

More on House Speaker Andy Dillion Recall (Michigan)

April 16, 2008 by 9 Comments

Warner Todd Huston

This fight is getting fierce, as I reported last month. Like all Democrats who claim to be interested in democracy, politicians like Dillon reveal that they are far more interested in keeping their political power than they are in serving the people. Dillon is the Speaker of the House of the State legislature who is using union thugs to stop citizens from signing a recall petition aimed at relieving him of his office over his support of wasteful spending and a massive tax increase.

It’s gotten so bad with the fear of the entrenched Democrat power structure, even the Michigan Assoc. of Police Organizations has jumped in to fight the citizen’s right to free political expression with an automated phone call that tells citizens that an “extremist” group is out to topple Dillon.

This is a perfect example of entrenched politicians abusing their power to stay in office and doing their level best to destroy the legal, legitimate efforts of community groups so that they, the politicians, can remain in power.

We like to imagine that we are in a democracy, but examples like this are perfect reasons to at times doubt that assumption. This is the most cynical effort of thwarting the citizen’s wishes that has been seen in quite a while and a spotlight needs to be shed on it for all to see.

If you want all the nuts and bolts of the legality of the fight, Ballotpedia.org has some fantastic info on this effort.

Continue reading “More on House Speaker Andy Dillion Recall (Michigan)”

00Publius Contributor - Budget - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - GOP - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Taxes - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Let’s Fool Taxpayers And Hide Taxes Behind A New Name: ‘Dues’

April 16, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Well, it was just April 15th and we all know what that means. It was tax day, the day when we must pay tribute to the Lords in Washington. And on that day, The New York Times published a new spendaholic, high taxing idea to fool America’s taxpayers into accepting more tax by pretending it is something else. Stuffed with bad historic interpretation, Republican slamming, and typical old style Stalinist rhetorical games-playing this editorial by Richard Conniff whimsically dreams the dreamy, dream that we aren’t taxed enough and how we might fool Americans into paying more by just using a different name for them. To whit they aren’t to be called taxes anymore. They’re to be called “dues.”

Conniff begins his uninformed rant against people who stand against high taxes by implying that we are even unpatriotic if we don’t support confiscatory taxation and that our politicians are just too weak spinned to properly lead us to higher taxes despite public opinion.

The word “tax” was never pretty. But it has lately become the ugliest word in the English language, right up there with its evil twin, “death.” Even in time of war, ostensibly patriotic politicians blithely pledge to slay any tax that rears its ghastly head. Public officials dodge work they know desperately needs doing because of the possibility that it may cause an increase in taxes.

Conniff’s is a rather uninformed view of how the concept of taxes has been treated by politicians throughout American history, sadly. He says that taxes have “lately” become an “ugly word,” yet that is not the truth at all. Taxes have been a hot button issue since before the day Bostonians threw the tea in the harbor, so the claim that only “lately” have they become something politicians wish to avoid is simply misinformed.

And, even more ridiculously, Conniff imagines that the only way things get done is by more taxes. He completely rejects out of hand with his editorial the concept that wasteful spending be cut and ways of making the budget more efficient be investigated because he wastes not a word on the subject.

Then Conniff gets into the Republican bashing.
Continue reading “Let’s Fool Taxpayers And Hide Taxes Behind A New Name: ‘Dues’”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Elections - GOP - Illinois ConCon - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Taxes - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Illinois, We DO Have a Voice — Vote YES on ConCon NOW

April 13, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

There is no doubt that the State of Illinois is broken. We have crooks running every state office on both sides of the aisle — Republican AND Democrat. We have $106 BILLION of unfunded liabilities and that debt to the State Government is growing every single day. Nearly on a daily basis we have our representatives and officials being indicted and sent to jail. We have a Democrat Governor who cannot work with either party (yes even the one that voted him into office) and who constantly goes on TV and announces new spending measures that he has never brought before the State government.

Illinois is the most corrupt State of the union. It’s just that simple.

So, what can we do? The voters and the citizens of Illinois have absolutely no say whatever in this State government. Aren’t we just up a creek without a paddle?

NO. The time is NOW for change. We DO have a voice, but only for a short time, so ACT NOW. It’s called a Constitutional Convention — or the ConCon. If we, the average citizens of the State of Illinois speak up now, we CAN have our say.

So, what the heck is this ConCon? It may sound boring, or too complicated for you to bother with. You may even think that since it is all involved with the government, you will still be on the outside looking in if you aren’t in that government.

Worse, the powers on both sides of the aisle in our state government are trying to keep this whole ConCon under wraps until it is too late for community groups to get organized to talk about it.

But it doesn’t have to be that way.

Article 14 of the Illinois State Constitution says that every 20 years a Constitutional Convention will be called to consider changes to our State Constitution. It is now time for that 20-year call to be sounded. But if it slips by we will be out of luck for another 20 years, another 20 years where we won’t have a chance to take back our government.

This is NOT just a liberal or conservative call to arms, either. We citizens of the State have an opportunity to slap down our arrogant and criminal politicians regardless of our individual political leaning. They cannot hold us down anymore!

But we need to spread the word that we need to vote YES on the ConCon!

We have a chance to add a recall to get rid of criminals like Rod Blagojevich to our Constitution. We have the chance to fix our overspending ways. There are so many things we can do but ONLY if we vote YES on the ConCon.

SPEAK UP FOR CHANGE IN ILLINOIS… Vote YES on the ConCon!

For more info go to the Illinois Citizen Coalition.

Here is a 30-minute video that offers some facts on the ConCon:


Continue reading “Illinois, We DO Have a Voice — Vote YES on ConCon NOW”

00Publius Contributor - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Founders - Judges - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

A Good Day, Supreme Court Rules Against Foreign Precedent

April 7, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

In 2003, then Justice of the Supreme Court Sandra Day O’Connor famously posited that our judicial system should take into account foreign court rulings when deciding American cases prompting outraged conservatives to denounce her idea as endangering American sovereignty and destroying the Constitution of the United States of America. This year, the Roberts led SCOTUS has made an important decision that will serve to forestall that possibility.

In October of 2003, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor gave a speech in Atlanta where she predicted that “over time we will rely increasingly, or take notice at least increasingly, of international and foreign courts in examining domestic issues.” Naturally, Americans who revere the Constitution were outraged over the thought that we’d place foreign court rulings before our own law of the land, essentially allowing foreigners to decide questions of American jurisprudence.

The fear over allowing foreign precedent or areas of jurisdiction to overlap into ours raises discussion of the very differences between our system of government and legal traditions and that of the rest of the world. Should we rely on foreign precedent, for instance, the very concept of innocent until proven guilty is put into doubt because foreign rulings will not generally be based on that bedrock principle.

Further, should American courts recognize the kangaroo courts of The Hague and the so-called “International Court of Justice” (or the World Court), foreign institutions such as these would have the authority to incarcerate American citizens for their politically motivated, anti-American “trials” at any time. After all, should we cast away our Constitutional rights by allowing foreign rulings to take precedence over our system, this will be bound to occur. What would stop such a thing from happening, anyway?

Continue reading “A Good Day, Supreme Court Rules Against Foreign Precedent”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Citizens Revolt Against Boston PD’s Jackbooted Gun Hunt

March 27, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

A few months ago, the Boston police department announced it would form a squad of uniformed police that would roam about certain “high risk” neighborhoods on the hunt for guns. The plan would be that these police squads would arrive at the doors of home owners, knock a few times, and “politely” ask residents if they would consent to a warrantless search of the premises — as if asking nicely was all the state needs to do to make it OK to abrogate the Constitution!

Well, apparently the community has discovered what a violation of trust and Constitutional rights this sort of jackbooted action would be. According to the Boston Globe, residents have “surprised” the police by intense opposition to the plan. The Boston Globe reports the shock and aw shucks of the police.

Boston police officials, surprised by intense opposition from residents, have significantly scaled back and delayed the start of a program that would allow officers to go into people’s homes and search for guns without a warrant.

The program, dubbed Safe Homes, was supposed to start in December, but has been delayed at least three times because of misgivings in the community. March 1 was the latest missed start date.

Apparently, citizens are a bit alarmed that the police imagine that they can just roam about preemptively “stopping” crimes that have yet to be committed. One community group has been circulating a petition to stop the program cold.

And here is the claim that the police have for their little program…

Police would ask parents or legal guardians for permission to search homes where juveniles ages 17 and under are believed to be holding illegal guns. Police would only enter homes into which they have been invited and, once inside, would only search the rooms of the juveniles.

This is an outright falsehood. Police legally CANNOT be limited to a single goal like they would be with a warrant. If the police enter a home, whether bidden or unbidden, they are obligated to act on anything that raises their suspicions. In effect, even if the homeowner imagined that they were only going to have police enter under a single premise, any violations the police see upon entering is fair game for police actions. In other words, by inviting police into the home, the homeowner is opening himself up to trouble even if he imagines the police are only there for one reason!

Community members are beginning to realize this fact, too.

Sarah Wunsch, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who has attended meetings about the plan, said those warnings are unnerving.

“People on the street may say: ‘This is great. I’m letting them in,’ ” she said. “But those are the people I’m concerned about, because they haven’t been educated about the hazards.”

What we have here is an violation of the Constitution, plain and simple. The police may have what some might consider good intentions. But, destroying the Constitution even for good intentions is no way to go about improving the community.

I hope that the communities in Boston continue to oppose these illegal police policies. So far, they are doing a good job doing so.

____________

Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as newsbusters.org, townhall.com, New Media Journal, Men’s News Daily and the New Media Alliance among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of publiusforum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions : EMAIL Warner Todd Huston

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Judges - Military - News - Patriotism - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Anti-War Judge Won’t Allow Foster Child to Join Marines

March 8, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Children’s Court Commissioner Marilyn Mackel of Simi Valley, California is against our actions in Iraq. With that said, this activist judge felt she had the right to prevent a foster child under her jurisdiction from joining the Marines. This refusal is an obscene abuse of power based solely on her hatred for the U.S. military. And she’s done this before.

The L.A. Daily News gives us the outrageous story of young Shawn Sage, a foster child, who appeared before judge Mackel to ask for permission to sign with the Marines for an early enlistment. Sage is 17 and would have been eligible for a $10,000 signing bonus upon signing. The young man has long dreamed of joining the Marines and is shocked that this judge denied him permission to join.

“The judge said she didn’t support the Iraq war for any reason why we’re over there,” said Marine recruiter Sgt. Guillermo Medrano of the Simi Valley USMC recruiting office.

“She just said all recruiters were the same – that they `all tap dance and tell me what I want to hear.’ She said she didn’t want him to fight in it.”

According to the L.A. Daily News, Makel also denied another young foster child who wanted to join the Navy because she feels that all military recruiters are liars and just want “another warm body.”

As Mr. Sage stood before the judge he had the backing of several members of the military as well as his brother and his foster parents behind him. Yet regardless of all the adult support this young man had for his quest, this out of control judge ruled against his right to join our nation’s military.

But something good may be coming from this episode despite of all this military-hating judge’s actions. The legislature is stepping in and doing their job deflating some of this un-American judge’s power. As a result of this judge’s untoward acts, Shawn Sage submitted a proposal to a local California lawmaker’s write a bill challenge and Mr. Sage’s proposal has since become Bill AB2238.
Continue reading “Anti-War Judge Won’t Allow Foster Child to Join Marines”

00Publius Contributor - Crime - Democrats/Leftists - Immigration/Immigrants - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

AP Forgets to Mention Identity Thief is an Illegal Alien

February 24, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

I hate to say it, but for a “news” service that is supposed to thrive on the “facts,” the Associated Press sure seems to leave out an awful lot of them in their wire stories. We’ve seen dozens of examples of that when they conveniently forget to mention the political party affiliation when a public servant caught up in crime or scandal and happens to be a Democrat. We have also seen the AP somehow forget to mention when a criminal happens to be an illegal alien. Well, here is yet anther case where a crime is committed by an illegal and the AP seems to have developed amnesia about the fact that the criminal is an illegal alien.

In AP’s report headlined “Man Accused of Stealing 7-Year-Old’s ID”, the AP gives us the tale of a 7-year-old boy who’s Soc. Sec. # was stolen, the theft discovered when the boy’s mother tried to file her taxes. Their report is short and interestingly lacking one little detail…

CARPENTERSVILLE, Ill. (AP) — Police in a Chicago suburb say the Internal Revenue Service has told a 7-year-old boy he owes back taxes on $60,000 because someone else has been using the youngster’s identity to collect wages and unemployment benefits.

Officers in suburban Carpentersville said Friday the second-grader’s identity has been in use by someone else since 2001.

Detectives have filed a felony identity theft charge against 29-year-old Cirilo Centeno of Streamwood, Ill.

OK, folks, take a wild guess what the legal status of our nefarious Mr. Cirilo Centeno is?

Well, you might be able to guess, but the AP sure isn’t going to help you much. To fill out the facts of the case, we need to turn to the Chicago Daily Herald which reports that one tiny, little missing fact…(my emphasis)

Centeno said he bought the card for $50 from a friend and used it because he is in the country illegally, police said.

Gosh, what a surprise, eh?

Now, why is it that the AP felt it necessary to omit the fact that their criminal subject is an illegal alien? Is it not germane to the story? If they don’t think so, how do they justify that claim?

Continue reading “AP Forgets to Mention Identity Thief is an Illegal Alien”

00Publius Contributor - 2nd Amendment - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - History - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - The Law - Warner Todd Huston

Why DC’s Gun Law Is Unconstitutional

February 23, 2008 by

David E. Young has written a fantastic, historical treatment of why a recent amicus brief in favor of the D.C. gun ban is way off base as well as based on bad historical research. Filed by “fifteen professional academic historians,” the piece makes all sorts of missteps and excludes fact all too often. These so-called historians are just plain wrong so often that one gets the feeling that they let agenda get in the way of truth and research.

This piece was originally published by the History News Network and is a must read for anyone interested in our 2nd Amendment rights.
******

Why DC’s Gun Law Is Unconstitutional

Historical arguments about American bills of rights are major points of discussion in the District of Columbia vs Heller case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. At issue is exactly what the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution means and whether it was proper for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to overturn Washington D.C.’s handgun ban for violating the Second Amendment. An amicus brief in support of Washington D.C.’s handgun ban dealing with the historical issues in the case was filed by fifteen professional academic historians. One would expect such a brief to be historically accurate, address the Second Amendment in its proper Bill of Rights related context, and include the most relevant figures, statements, and actions for understanding any historical issues in the dispute. However, any such expectation is left largely unfulfilled in the historians’ brief.

The historians’ Heller amicus brief begins with a look at the English Bill of Rights, which limited only the king, not the legislative branch of government. James Madison indicated during his speech to Congress introducing the Bill of Rights provisions that the comparison was inapplicable. The reason was because their purposes were different. England’s Bill of Rights did not limit the legislative branch at all, while the fundamental rights protections in American bills of rights were understood as limiting all branches of government.

The historians’ brief bizarrely claims that only two states, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, actually made their declarations of rights a part of their state constitutions. This statement is factually incorrect. On the contrary, two other states, Vermont and North Carolina, copied verbatim the Pennsylvania Constitution’s language making their declaration of rights a part of their state constitution. Also, George Mason specifically stated in the Virginia Ratifying Convention that the 1776 Virginia Bill of Rights, which he was the author of, was part of Virginia’s Constitution. Mason’s statement was made to illustrate the need for a federal bill of rights based upon the state bills of rights because the proposed U.S. Constitution allowed Congress to violate the rights of the citizens that were protected in the state bills of rights. Other historical materials exist that directly contradict the historians in this matter as well.
Continue reading “Why DC’s Gun Law Is Unconstitutional”