and we start to become the United States of Jesus Land...

T

Tempistfury

It Wandered In From the Wastes
Saw this and was like "OMG, this sucks." Yeah I know its a long read, but Anyone who lives in America should read this...

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=104&ItemID=7569


(alarmist?) News Paper Article said:
Introducing The Constitution Restoration Act
Say Hello To Taliban America And Goodbye To Godless Judges, Courts And Law

Tired of waiting for the Second Coming to enforce Christ's rule on Earth? Fortunately, so is your Congress and they know how to "bring it on."

Just when you thought the corporatist/Christian Coalition had milked the 9/11 "surprise" for all it was worth in powers, profits and votes, we regret to report that you may have to think again. Just in case you've briefly fallen behind on your rightwing mailing lists, you might have missed the March 3rd filing of Senate bill S. 520 and House version is H.R. 1070, AKA the "Constitution Restoration Act" (CRA).

In the worshipful words of the Conservative Caucus, this historic legislation will "RESTORE OUR CONSTITUTION!", mainly by barring ANY federal court or judge from ever again reviewing "any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government." [Emphasis demanded - see full text here.]

In other words, the bill ensures that God's divine word (and our infallible leaders' interpretation thereof) will hereafter trump all our pathetic democratic notions about freedom, law and rights -- and our courts can't say a thing. This, of course, will take "In God We Trust" to an entirely new level, because soon He (and His personally anointed political elite) will be all the legal recourse we have left.

This is not a joke, a test, or a fit of libertarian paranoia. The CRA already has 28 sponsors in the House and Senate, and a March 20 call to lead sponsor Sen. Richard Shelby's office assures us that "we have the votes for passage." This is a highly credible projection as Bill Moyers observes in his 3/24/05 "Welcome to Doomsday" piece in the New York Review of Books: "The corporate, political, and religious right's hammerlock... extends to the US Congress. Nearly half of its members before the election-231 legislators in all (more since the election)-are backed by the religious right... Forty-five senators and 186 members of the 108th Congress earned 80 to 100 percent approval ratings from the most influential Christian Right advocacy groups."

This stunning bill and the movement behind it deserve immediate crash study on at least 3 different fronts.

1. Its hostile divorce of American jurisprudence from our hard-won secular history and international norms. To again quote the Conservative Caucus: "This important bill will restrict the jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court and all lower federal courts to that permitted by the U.S. Constitution, including on the subject of the acknowledgement of God (as in the Roy Moore 10 Commandments issue); and it also restricts federal courts from recognizing the laws of foreign countries and international law [e.g., against torture, global warming, unjust wars, etc. - ed.] as the supreme law of our land."

Re the last point, envision some doddering judges who still revere our Declaration of Independence's "decent respect to the opinions of mankind," and suppose they invoke in their rulings some international precepts from the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women or, God forbid, the Geneva Conventions. Well, under the CRA that would all be clearly illegal and, thank God, that's the last we'd ever hear from them.

2. The political implications of replacing "we the people" with a Christian deity as the "sovereign source" of all our laws.

Imagine hyper-zealous officers or "entities" of the Federal, State, or local government (like a governor, legislature or school board) that mandate Christian prayers, rituals and/or statuary in public buildings under their control. Were this to happen, some local Jews, Muslims and/or Buddhists might be moved to hire a lawyer and legally object. But if the CRA passes, their objection would be beyond any court's jurisdiction and that's the last we'd ever hear of that. It in fact demands "impeachment, conviction, and removal of judges" who dare to even hear a case that challenges its "Last Days" morphing of Christian church and state. (Just how our new Sovereign Source of Government's advocacy of public executions for adultery, gay-ness, contraception and blasphemy will fit into our current corrections system still remains to be seen.)

3 The incessant mainstream media blackout on the bill's existence and import.

The potential impact of the Constitution Restoration Act on American life, law and politics is so radical and vast that you would expect a boiling national debate. Yet just as with the crimes and questions of 9/11, everyone in the media seems terrifically busy looking the other way. If you want yet another dramatic metric of US journalistic dysfunction, try Googling "Constitution Restoration Act" in their News category and see what you get. Today, three weeks after the bill was filed, I find a grand total of three throwaway mentions in Alabama's Shelby County Reporter, the Decatur Daily, and the Massachusetts Daily Collegian. ("Terry Schiavo" in contrast will net you over a thousand news hits, and "Michael Jackson" just passed 36,000 with a bullet.)

If the Alabama paper interest seems a little odd or sponsor Shelby's name a bit familiar, you should recall that this old boy AL senator was high among those same wonderful folks who kicked off the 9/11 cover-up. As his Senate bio proudly relates:

"From 1995 to 2003, Senator Shelby served on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. In this capacity, he and the other committee members provided oversight of the intelligence community, and following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Senator Shelby served diligently to investigate the intelligence failures that led to those attacks." [Emphasis demanded again.]

Got that? First he "oversees" intelligence for six years before 9/11, then "diligently investigates" its bizarre "failures" for two years more, and finally finds--in a no-fault judgment--it was all due to "deep institutional defects" and "systemic miscommunication" that he'd apparently never noticed or heard about before. Having so brilliantly defended the country before 9/11 and the official story since, some seem to find it comforting that he's now busy defending our court-harassed Constitution with a legally bulletproofed God. Some, alas, do not -- feel comforted, that is, either by Shelby's blurry oversight or fundamentalist agenda, not to mention the Orwellian performance of our autistic corporate press.

In the meantime, however, before the CRA takes force and reduces legal education to a Bible study course, what say we undertake a little Constitutional defense of our own? To get up to speed on the current Christian right agenda, Moyers' "Welcome to Doomsday", Katherine Yurica's "The Despoiling of America" and John "The 9/11 Truth Candidate" Buchanan's "Fixing America" are excellent places to start.

None of these analyses offer a silver bullet or paint a pretty picture, but as students of 9/11 now know, spreading the courage to face the truth is really the only hope we've got.

W. David Kubiak is a Project Censored award-winning journalist and executive director of 911truth.org. He can be reached at david(at)911truth.org. (He is indebted to John Buchanan for the latest heads-up on this story and the Shelby office call.)
Click to expand...
 
With "surprise" in quotes, I find it hard to take this article seriously. It would still have to be passed through the Supreme Court, though, assuming that it even got off the floor in Congress.
 
Well now, let's take a look at this bill without the rhetoric. I've highlighted the key parts:

http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/HR3799ConstitutionRestorationAct.html

Constitution Restoration Act of 2004

HR 3799 IH



108th CONGRESS

2d Session



H. R. 3799
To limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 11, 2004




Mr. ADERHOLT (for himself and Mr. PENCE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A BILL
To limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.



Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Constitution Restoration Act of 2004'.

TITLE I--JURISDICTION

SEC. 101. APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

(a) IN GENERAL-

(1) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable

`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

(2) TABLE OF SECTIONS- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`1260. Matters not reviewable.'.

(b) APPLICABILITY- Section 1260 of title 28, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall not apply to an action pending on the date of enactment of this Act, except to the extent that a party or claim is sought to be included in that action after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 102. LIMITATIONS ON JURISDICTION.

(a) IN GENERAL-

(1) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28- Chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end of the following:

`Sec. 1370. Matters that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review

`Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the district court shall not have jurisdiction of a matter if the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review that matter by reason of section 1260 of this title.'.

(2) TABLE OF SECTIONS- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`1370. Matters that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review.'.

(b) APPLICABILITY- Section 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall not apply to an action pending on the date of enactment of this Act, except to the extent that a party or claim is sought to be included in that action after the date of enactment of this Act.

TITLE II--INTERPRETATION

SEC. 201. INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.

In interpreting and applying the Constitution of the United States, a court of the United States may not rely upon any constitution, law, administrative rule, Executive order, directive, policy, judicial decision, or any other action of any foreign state or international organization or agency, other than the constitutional law and English common law.

TITLE III--ENFORCEMENT

SEC. 301. EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL CASES NOT BINDING ON STATES.

Any decision of a Federal court which has been made prior to or after the effective date of this Act, to the extent that the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction under section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by this Act, is not binding precedent on any State court.

SEC. 302. IMPEACHMENT, CONVICTION, AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES FOR CERTAIN EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL ACTIVITIES.

To the extent that a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States or any judge of any Federal court engages in any activity that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court of that justice or judge, as the case may be, by reason of section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by this Act, engaging in that activity shall be deemed to constitute the commission of--

(1) an offense for which the judge may be removed upon impeachment and conviction; and

(2) a breach of the standard of good behavior required by article III, section 1 of the Constitution.
END
Click to expand...

So what does this really mean? It would seem that the bill intends to preserve a government employee's right to make an action regarding the acknowlegement of God as the absolute law of the land. The problem is, here, that the absolute law of the land, the law which politicans swear to uphold is the Constitution. Which is ironic, as in the second highlighted portion, justices would be limited to making judgements based solely on the Constitution.

Confusing? You bet.

So what does it really mean? Well, unless I missed a key line of text, I think the bill is intended to preserve said right to acknowlege God, as well as limiting interpretations of domestic law to the Constitution. What I think this means, is that a government employee's right to act on an acknowlege of God is protected, yet if those actions violate the Constitution itself, he or she would be subject to review.

It also only mentions the Supreme Court, and doesn't make mention of any lower courts being able to review a case brought against a government employee based on said acknowlegement of God.

This bill is vague as fuck.
 
`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.
Click to expand...

Who writes this stuff?

In other words:
The Supreme Court can't overturn a decision by any level of government that protected a person or organization when they acknowledged god as the law.

This means that it protects a Christian’s right to cite god or the bible as law, but it can also protect all the crap that the original article said would occur.

If they are going to pass this thing, then it should come with this:
A Christian individual or organization can't overturn a decision by any level of government that protected a person or organization when they acknowledged the constitution as the law.
 
calculon00 said:
`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.
Click to expand...

Who writes this stuff?

In other words:
The Supreme Court can't overturn a decision by any level of government that protected a person or organization when they acknowledged god as the law.

This means that it protects a Christian’s right to cite god or the bible as law, but it can also protect all the crap that the original article said would occur.

If they are going to pass this thing, then it should come with this:
A Christian individual or organization can't overturn a decision by any level of government that protected a person or organization when they acknowledged the constitution as the law.
Click to expand...
Ah, my home country. What else will it think of next?
Land of the free, home of the brave, and liberty and justice for all.
 
Bradylama said:
You don't have to announce sarcasm, its implied. I mean, tcha.
Click to expand...
you seem to have a personal problem with me right now.
anyways *turns the other cheek*
This bill is nothing.
congress is passing a bill giving the credit card companies more tools on how to still make people pay if they declare backruptcy. So now they cant escape debt. For 10 years the credit card Co. wanted it to pass, and clintion said no. But BUSH says he is ready to pass the bill. :roll:
 
Got to love power grabs.

Prophecy from Something Awful?

Something Awful RE: Schiavo said:
"I really hope that your daughter's ultimate sacrifice - becoming a humiliating public spectacle for your financial and political gain and a tool for the character assassination of her husband - will pay dividends down the road and allow the Republican dominated legislative and executive branch to erode the checks and balances imposed by the tyranny of the judicial branch. Just like Terri always wanted. "
Click to expand...
 
Interesting. The Congress can limit the power of the court to decide matters of law. Much of the court's jurisdiction is based on either it's own view of the constraints imposed by the Consitution or the power of Congress to limit what the court's can decide.

That said, this issue would seem to suggest a problem of the establishment clause. Some bills are passed and pushed forward as signalling devices- in this case the signal may be to the courts that "you activist judges best watch your step!" least activitist legislators further take away its power.

A silly bill that reflects the rather absurd state of things in Washington. Thank you Christian Right for making the US seem even more foolish.
 
Hey, and if the USA ever got into a civil war; we Euro's could wait around untill half of you are slaughtered already, then let the Ruskies do all the hard work, and then land on a beach somewhere and bug you about 'saving your ass' for the next sixty years or so.
 
Unlikely. Our armed forces are still as powerful as the rest of the world's combined. Frankly, I look forward to the Christian Fundementalist USA's war of purifcacion in Europe. It would be like the Thirty Year's War, only the Protestants are Secularists and we, the Catholics, have nuclear wepons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top