Posts Tagged ‘searches’

Oath KeepersFrom the Oath Keepers’ “Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey“:

2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers, or effects – such as warrantless house-to house searches for weapons or persons.

If the warrantless door-to-door searches which took place in Boston had taken place in a city with a notable number of Oath Keepers, it would’ve put the organization and the individual Oath Keepers to the test.

It will be interesting to hear if any Oath Keepers participated in, or refused to participate in, these unconstitutional and unlawful searches in Boston.

Should any significant number of Oath Keepers be put to the test and fail, the organization will prove to mostly serve an educational purpose that also gives the enemies of liberty a list of possible resisters to neutralize.

For more on the Boston Marathon bombings, see my article, How you were misled in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombings.

Read Full Post »

Gov. Jesse Ventura (Ref-MN)

From my analysis, the judge acted in accordance with the law in throwing the case out, correctly ruling that Ventura had no standing, because the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case.

That is constitutional, since Congress has the power to create and abolish any federal courts below the Supreme Court that it wants (Article I, Section 8, clause 9 of the Constitution), and set the rules of judicial proceedings thereof, and they put jurisdiction in these cases in the Circuits Court of Appeals.

Even though the TSA searches are unconstitutional, in violation the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches, there is the separate constitutional issue of whether a particular court has the jurisdiction to hear the case, and in Ventura’s case, I think the judge rightly ruled that it didn’t.

This is an educational opportunity for those who say that the Constitution is the greatest document ever written by man, since it is also the document that lawfully allows Congress to keep American citizens from individually challenging the constitutionality of TSA searches. The Constitution only gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over cases involving ambassadors and where one of the parties is a State, so the only constitutional way to put a stop to these TSA searches, barring an explicit constitutional amendment, is for Congress to change the law, or for one or more of the States to successfully challenge it in the Supreme Court.

But just because the Supreme Court has jurisdiction doesn’t mean it is obliged to hear the case. It likely won’t, just like it didn’t hear the cases concerning President Obama’s eligibility for president, so again, the ball falls back in the people’s court in putting pressure on Congress.

Read Full Post »