To All Judges,
"This constitution, shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding." (U.S. Constitution, Article VI, paragraph 2.)
"The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, and any statue, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows: The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted." "Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principals follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.... A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177.
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution, are null and void." Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 5, U.S. (Cranch) 137, 174,176
"Where the meaning of the constitution is clear and unambiguous, there can be no resort to construction to attribute to the founders a purpose of intent not manifest in its letter." Norris v. Baltimore, 172, Md. 667; 192 A 531.0.
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.
"If the legislature clearly misinterprets a constitutional provision, the frequent repetition of the wrong will not create a right." Amos v. Mosley, 74 Fla. 555; 77 So. 619.
"It is the peculiar value of a written constitution that it places in unchanging form limitations upon the legislation and thus gives a permanence and stability to popular government which otherwise would be lacking." Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412.
"The courts cannot rightly prefer, of the possible meanings of the words of the constitution, that which will defeat rather than effectuate the constitutional purpose." United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299.
"The constitution is an instrument from the people and a construction thereof should effectuate their purpose from the words employed in the document; and the courts may not color it by the addition of words or the ingrafting of their views as to how it should be written." Ervin v. Collins, Fla. 85 S. 852; 59 ALR 706.
"The basic purpose of a written constitution has a twofold aspect, first the securing to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined fields." DuPont v. DuPont, Sup. 32 Ded. Ch. 413; 85 A 2d 724.
"The State cannot diminish rights of the people." Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516
"Constitutions are not primarily designed to protect majorities, who are usually able to protect themselves, but rather to preserve and protect the rights of individuals and minorities against arbitrary action of those in authority." Houston County v. Martin, 232 A 1 511; 169 So. 13.
"In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution." Thomas Jefferson.
"Thus it is easy to understand how law, instead of checking injustice, becomes the invincible weapon of injustice. It is easy to understand why the law is used by the legislator to destroy in varying degrees among the rest of the people, their personal independence by slavery, their liberty by oppression, and their property by plunder. This is done for the benefit of the person who makes the law, and in proportion to the power that he holds." Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850).
"Our Bill of Rights curbs all three branches of government. It subjects all departments of government to a rule of law and sets boundaries beyond which no official may go. It emphasizes that in this country man walks with dignity and without fear, that he need not grovel before an all powerful government." Justice William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court.
Here is a Quote from the Office of Legislative Counsel in regards to Legislative Acts being passed off as law by Our Law makers: “This document contains a summary of the general statutes of state-wide application which were enacted at the 2009 regular session of the General Assembly of Georgia. This summary is not to be deemed in any manner as an opinion from the Office of Legislative Counsel, and the question of constitutionality has not been considered in any respect”. Sewell R. Brumby Legislative Counsel. (And Our Legislatures continue to pass more and more Un-Constitutional Laws). What is wrong with the Public Officials running Our Country, that any Legislative body would pass any Law without even considering if the New Law is Constitutional or not?
WE the People of the United States, not we the Public officials!
Public officers are the trustees and Servants of the People and are at all times to be amenable.
Ga. Const. Art. I, § II, Para. V (2009) What acts Void
“Legislative acts in violation of this Constitution or the Constitution of the United States are void, and the judiciary shall so declare them”.
Should any Judge refuse to Declare Void, all Legislative acts in violation of Our Constitution (Unjust Laws), when brought to their attention by any citizen, shall he or she, not then be Guilty of False Swearing (Felony)?
When any Judge fails to Honor to uphold their Constitutional Oath, shall not this Judge be Guilty of False Swearing, become a Liar, commit a Felony?
How many Criminal Offenses may a Judge face for Refusing and or Failing to Honor their Oath of office to uphold the Constitution and Protect each Citizens Freedoms and Rights as so Secured by the Constitution?--- O.C.G.A. Title 16: Crimes & Offenses---What about Federal Criminal offenses as well?
Everyone makes Poor choices sometime in their Life, but a person of Good Will is going to be willing to do the Right thing, when it is brought to their attention that they have made a Poor choice.
-- Now is the Time--
To Stop Corruption in All of Our Government and hold Our Public officials accountable!
--We cannot afford to Lose any more Freedoms!—
--By Our Failure to take Positive action, We shall be just as Guilty as those taking Our Freedoms away from us.
Another article by ---Duzey
« Back to index