Its That Darn Pesky Constitution

There has been an uproar toward something Our Dear Supreme Leader has made….14th amendment has been in the news and there has been a wealth of  opinions if he can actually change the Constitution with and Executive Order (EO)…..

My opinion is NO he cannot…..(but that has not stopped those from foaming at the mouth to end some of our protections)….and like always there are those opinions in contrary to the EO thing……

President Trump said this week that he is preparing an executive order to try to take away the citizenship guarantee in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which says that people born in the United States are United States citizens. On Tuesday, Sen. Lindsey Graham announced that he would introduce legislation with the same aim.

But the president cannot repeal part of the Constitution by executive order. And Congress cannot repeal it by simply passing a new bill. Amending the Constitution would require a two-thirds vote in both House and Senate, and also ratification by three-quarters of the states. The effort to erase the citizenship guarantee will never clear those hurdles — for very good reasons.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/10/31/no-mr-president-you-cant-change-constitution-executive-order

This below is an open letter sent to our Troops by veterans……

To All Active Duty Soldiers:

Your Commander-in-chief is lying to you. You should refuse his orders to deploy to the southern U.S. border should you be called to do so. Despite what Trump and his administration are saying, the migrants moving North towards the U.S. are not a threat. These small numbers of people are escaping intense violence. In fact, much of the reason these men and women—with families just like yours and ours—are fleeing their homes is because of the US meddling in their country’s elections. Look no further than Honduras, where the Obama administration supported the overthrow of a democratically elected president who was then replaced by a repressive dictator.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/11/01/your-commander-chief-lying-you-veterans-issue-open-letter-active-duty-us-soldiers

Not to worry like always there is more……

“The Trump administration asked, and the Pentagon said no—to using troops on the southern border for law-enforcement purposes, CNN reports. Two defense officials say the Department of Homeland Security wanted US troops to provide “crowd and traffic control” and protect Customs and Border Protection officers from the so-called “caravan” of Central American migrants heading for the US border. But on Oct. 26, the Pentagon denied that request, while agreeing to provide engineers, medical personnel, and air and logistics support. Why the refusal? Because the Department of Defense apparently argued that active-duty troops don’t have the authority.

Indeed, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits US troops from enforcing domestic law unless authorized by Congress or the US Constitution. “Limiting military involvement in civilian affairs is basic to our system of government and the protection of individual constitutional rights,” the 1878 act reads. A DHS official denied that Trump’s request constituted “law enforcement activities,” while military analysts said Trump could just use US Marshals, ICE, or the National Guard for such activities. Meanwhile, Trump is easing off his remark that US troops can “consider it a rifle” if migrants throw rocks, per Fox 13 Now. If soldiers or agents “are going to be hit in the face with rocks, we’re going to arrest those people,” he said Friday. “That doesn’t mean shoot them.

I realize the hard core Righties do not want to here it and they may soon have a chance to change things…..

But not to worry there are those that are working for a convention to change things….maybe just not the things that you have in mind.

Stay tuned!

“Making America Great Again”–Part 8

I continue the series on the formation of the new country of the United States of America……we have been though the early days….the battles and the war and now the country needs to come together and form a working government……

Part 8 of “American History for Truthdiggers.”

“Some men look at Constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, & deem them, like the Ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well: I belonged to it. …

“But I know also that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind … we might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.” —Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816

The U.S. Constitution stands almost as American scripture, deified and all but worshipped as the holy book for the American civil religion of republicanism. The above painting captures the spirit of modern memories, and mythology, surrounding the Constitutional Convention, which was held in Philadelphia. The sun shines through windows (which are conspicuously open) and delivers a halo of light upon the figure of the tall, erect George Washington. He stands, of course, on what resembles a religious altar, presiding over the delegates as they sign the sacred compact of American governance. Ben Franklin, himself an international celebrity by that time, sits prominently in the center, as the influential, young Alexander Hamilton whispers in his ear; meanwhile, the “father” of the Constitution, James Madison, sits just below the altar, on Franklin’s left.

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/american-history-for-truthdiggers-counterrevolution-of-1787-new-constitution-new-nation/

Interesting that we may be having this discussion once again.

Class Dismissed!

Birthright: An American Idea

Yep we are having one of those political moments that comes around ever so often….we had it when Muslims were coming get us all…then there was that Mexico was gonna pay for a wall…..and now it is the 14th amendment…..all were used for political gain and not one was heard of again….that is they were filed away until needed again.

I read a pretty good piece in the American Conservative that until the era of Trump was considered a pretty mainstream conservative publication…..my my how things change….but I digress…..TAC offers their conservative opinion on the issue of birthright citizenship……

The 14th Amendment became part of the U.S. Constitution 150 years ago in July of 1868. Among other things, it enshrined our traditional common law practice of granting citizenship to those born in the United States who are subject to its laws—specifically it guaranteed that the recently freed slaves and their descendants would be citizens. The 14th Amendment also applied to the children of immigrants, as its authors and opponents understood at the time.

President Trump’s immigration position paper, however, famously endorsed an end to birthright citizenship. Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration as well as a lecturer and researcher at Hillsdale College, pushed such a move recently in the Washington Post. Anton argued that President Trump should use his pen and his phone to exclude the children born here to noncitizens, with little thought of what would happen were such a policy enacted.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/birthright-citizenship-an-american-idea-that-works/

I have said the the challenge to the 14th could open up more challenges to some amendments like the 2nd and the 1st…maybe others…and those are not debates we want to have….so all this is probably just posturing for a vote.

Closing Thought–31Oct18–#2

Oh goody….looks like we may have a constitutional law battle on our hands……why?  It seems that Our Dear Supreme Leader has decided that he will try to make invalid parts of the US Constitution…..namely the 14th amendment…..

Whether President Trump can end birthright citizenship with an executive order comes down to one’s reading of the 14th Amendment. As NPR explains in a fact-check piece, a “small but vocal group of conservative legal scholars” have zeroed in on five crucial words, bolded here: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Those scholars say those words have been misinterpreted and that the authors’ true intention was that citizenship not be extended to the children of noncitizens. More:

  • The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board agrees with NPR’s take and gives more historical background, writing “‘jurisdiction’ is well understood as referring to the territory where the force of law applies, and that means it applies to nearly everyone on US soil. The exceptions in 1868 were diplomats (who have sovereign immunity) and Native Americans on tribal lands. Congress later granted Native Americans birth citizenship while diminishing tribal sovereignty.”
  • On Twitter Wednesday, Trump referenced those key words in making his argument to the contrary. He wrote in a trio of tweets (here, here, and here): “So-called Birthright Citizenship, which costs our Country billions of dollars and is very unfair to our citizens, will be ended one way or the other. It is not covered by the 14th Amendment because of the words ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ Many legal scholars agree….. ….Harry Reid was right in 1993, before he and the Democrats went insane and started with the Open Borders (which brings massive Crime) ‘stuff.’ Don’t forget the nasty term Anchor Babies. I will keep our Country safe. This case will be settled by the United States Supreme Court! The World is using our laws to our detriment. They laugh at the Stupidity they see!”
  • Lawyer George Conway, husband to Kellyanne Conway, aired his view in an op-ed written with Neal Katyal for the Washington Post: “Sometimes the Constitution’s text is plain as day and bars what politicians seek to do. That’s the case with President Trump’s proposal to end ‘birthright citizenship’ tendment was written after the Civil War with former slaves in mind. Conway and Katyal elaborate in their op-ed: “Birthright citizenship sprang from the ashes of the worst Supreme Court decision in US history, Dred Scott v. Sandford, the 1857 decision that said that slaves, and the children of slaves, could not be citizens of the United States. The blood of hundreds of thousands of Americans was shed to repudiate that idea.”hrough an executive order.”
  • Reuters adds more history, reporting that the amendment was written after the Civil War with former slaves in mind. Conway and Katyal elaborate in their op-ed: “Birthright citizenship sprang from the ashes of the worst Supreme Court decision in US history, Dred Scott v. Sandford, the 1857 decision that said that slaves, and the children of slaves, could not be citizens of the United States. The blood of hundreds of thousands of Americans was shed to repudiate that idea.”

Just something to think about…a closing thought as it were…..

OOPS! There Goes The Constitution

It is not humorous to think that the Constitution can be dismantle by an idiot with a pen and a fist full of Executive Orders.

That is just what Our Dear Supreme Leader is trying to do with his newest brain fart…..

President Trump tells Axios that he plans to make a fundamental change to US citizenship rules: Babies born on American soil will no longer automatically be considered citizens. The president says he’s been advised by constitutional experts that he can make the change to what’s known as birthright citizenship through an executive order. “We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States,” said Trump in an interview that airs in full on HBO this weekend. “It’s ridiculous. And it has to end.” (Actually, about 30 countries, including Canada, offer birthright citizenship.) The issue revolves around how the 14th Amendment is interpreted, and Axios notes that any such move by the president would be quickly challenged in court.

“It’s in the process,” said Trump. “It’ll happen … with an executive order.” The amendment states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The language has led to what critics call “birth tourism,” in which pregnant women enter the US for the express purpose of giving birth to attain citizenship for their child. In an interview with Fox News Monday night, Trump didn’t mention the executive order, but he said Central American migrants currently nearing the US border were “wasting their time.” Trump promised to erect “tent cities” on the border where any asylum seekers will be held while their legal case plays out. “We’re not catching, we’re not releasing,” he said. “We’re not letting them into this country.”

I wonder what the d/bags at the Federalist Society will have to say about this presidential brain fart?

Of course there are going to be those that think this announcement was made because the midterms are just days away…..

President Trump made big headlines Tuesday by revealing to Axios that he intends to end the practice of “birthright citizenship” with an executive order. Trump maintained that the idea of granting US citizenship to a newborn simply because the child was born on American soil is “ridiculous” and rejected the idea that he didn’t have the power to alter a protection cited in the Constitution.

How about the law for those like the President that have no damn idea on civics….The law: The 14th Amendment states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” USA Today explains that it was added in 1868, primarily to grant citizenship to freed slaves. (Legal aficionados can dig into this primer on relevant case law.)

Someone please take this president aside so he can stop embarrassing himself and the country.

Legalism Has Replaced Liberty

Today, 17Sep18, is Constitution Day….a day in my opinion that is the most important of days in the founding of this country….

On September 17, 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention met for the last time to sign the document they had created. We encourage all Americans to observe this important day in our nation’s history by attending local events in your area. Celebrate Constitution Day through activities, learning, parades and demonstrations of our Love for the United State of America and the Blessings of Freedom Our Founding Fathers secured for us.

For more information on the Constitution then this is the site you need…..http://www.constitutionday.com/

These days everyone seems to hug the Constitution and claim that their views or their candidates are the best representatives of the US Constitution…….you, as a voter, has heard it all from both sides of the political meter……

But actually our liberty has been replaced with of all things legalism.

For those still deluded enough to believe they’re living the American dream—where the government represents the people, where the people are equal in the eyes of the law, where the courts are arbiters of justice, where the police are keepers of the peace, and where the law is applied equally as a means of protecting the rights of the people—it’s time to wake up.

We no longer have a representative government, a rule of law, or justice.

Liberty has fallen to legalism.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/07/06/the-constitution-is-not-neutral/

The Constitution is become a political prop more so than those stupid straw hats of the past…..an understanding is not necessary to run for office just having a copy makes you the perfect candidate to protect the document….

Plus we have a political game of “Simon Says” with our Founders…..Jefferson is one of the most misquoted Founders…..then it is followed by Hamilton and Madison…..a game we need to STOP playing……

As the United States’ depressed, distracted, disorganized, and demobilized populace watches the vicious white-nationalist and authoritarian Donald Trump and the arch-reactionary Republican Party craft a Supreme Court yet further to the right of majority public opinion, the worst of the nation’s slave-owning Founders might just be heard chuckling in their graves.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/07/13/time-to-stop-playing-simon-says-with-james-madison-and-alexander-hamilton/

As a student US Political History I believe that the Constitution is a more deserving incident that deserves its recognized holiday……DoI was basically a grievances list…the Constitution established the rules for a nation.

Will It Be Perpetual War?

IN the beginning war could only be declared by act of Congress and then along came the attacks of 9/11 and the Congress gave their powers up to the president to declare war whenever the mood struck him.

The Authorization for the Use Of Military Force (AUMF) gave the president unlimited power to decide what was a war and when to go fight…..the Congress took a backseat….

In 2018 a bi-partisan bill has taken a new step forward…..

In the near future, Congress will debate a new Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). I use the word “debate” lightly. So far, no hearings have been scheduled, and no testimony is likely to be heard unless something changes. That’s a shame, because this is a serious matter, and this is a deeply flawed AUMF.

For some time now, Congress has abdicated its responsibility to declare war. The status quo is that we are at war anywhere and anytime the president says so.

So Congress—in a very Congress way of doing things—has a “solution.” Instead of reclaiming its constitutional authority, it instead intends to codify the unacceptable, unconstitutional status quo.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/rand-paul-congress-moves-to-give-the-president-unlimited-war-powers/

Yes I wrote that this was a bi-partisan bill……so how do the Dems fit into this bill?

If there is any surprise that Senate Democrats, most of whom are virtually indistinguishable from pro-war Republicans, are about to coalesce in support of the newest version of the Authority for the Use of Military Force of 2018 (AUMF), then you have seriously not been paying attention.

The proposed AUMF of 2018 would replace AUMF 2001 and  repeal AUMF 2002 while it will codify an “uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in armed conflict” against  the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS and as yet unidentified “designated associated forces” who might “pose a grave threat to the US” in whatever country they occupy.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/04/25/democratic-partys-war-history-and-aumf-2018

There is a provision in the new AUMF that has a disturbing consequence…..

……..a bipartisan group of six lawmakers, led by Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Tim Kaine, D-Va., is proposing a new AUMF that would greatly expand who the president can place in indefinite military detention, allin the name of restricting presidential power. If the Corker-Kaine bill becomes law as currently written, any president, including Donald Trump, could plausibly claim extraordinarily broad power to order the military to imprison any U.S. citizen, captured in America or not, and hold them without charges essentially forever.

https://theintercept.com/2018/05/01/ndaa-2018-aumf-detention/

I smell a challenge to this new attempt…..does not seem to be in the spirit of the Constitution…..

But we will see……it looks like more of the same or in other words….perpetual war.

Feminism In Review

Last week news came out that another state has ratified the ERA (Equal Right Amendment) making it so that only one more state needs to ratify and it will become the law of the land (I am sure there are a few that will cringe at the thought of women being equal)…..

I wrote about the last vote in a Closing Thought post…..

https://lobotero.com/2018/06/01/closing-thought-01jun18/

Step into the “Way Back” machine and set the dial for the 1970’s USA……Jimmy Carter is president and women started burning bras to get attention from the media……..this gave rise to feminism….and women have been fighting ever since……as of today can we decide what version of feminism we are in?

If one thing’s for sure, it’s that the second-wave feminists are at war with the third-wave feminists.

No, wait, the second-wavers are at war with the fourth-wave feminists.

No, it’s not the second-wavers, it’s the Gen X-ers.

Are we still cool with the first-wavers? Are they all racists now?

Is there actually intergenerational fighting about feminist waves? Is that a real thing?

Do we even use the wave metaphor anymore?

As the #MeToo movement barrels forward, as record numbers of women seek office, and as the Women’s March drives the resistance against the Trump administration, feminism is reaching a level of cultural relevance it hasn’t enjoyed in years. It’s now a major object of cultural discourse — which has led to some very confusing conversations because not everyone is familiar with or agrees on the basic terminology of feminism. And one of the most basic and most confusing terms has to do with waves of feminism.

https://www.vox.com/2018/3/20/16955588/feminism-waves-explained-first-second-third-fourth

I tried to do what I could to help women fight for their rights and their place in this society….a place beyond bare foot and pregnant and tied to the bed scenario….

They are getting close so now would be a good time for the old style feminism to be resurrected and work for that last state to ratify.

As soon as the dullards on the Right realize how close the ERA is they will double their efforts to see that it does not see the light of day in that last state.

Closing Thought–01Jun18

I would like to leave my readers today with a bit of history that almost everyone has forgotten but is not dead in the least.

That little slice of history is the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)……can you remember the fight back in the 70’s…….no?

The proposed Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) states that the rights guaranteed by the Constitution apply equally to all persons regardless of their sex. After the 19th Amendment affirming women’s right to vote was ratified in 1920, suffragist leader Alice Paul introduced the ERA in 1923 as the next step in bringing “equal justice under law” to all citizens.

In 1972, the ERA was finally passed by Congress and sent to the states for ratification. The original seven-year time limit was extended by Congress to June 30, 1982, but at that deadline, the ERA had been ratified by only 35 states, three states short of the 38 required to put it into the Constitution. The ERA has been introduced into every Congress since the deadline, and beginning in 1994, ERA advocates have been pursuing two different routes to ratification:

  • the traditional process described in Article V of the Constitution (passage by a two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, followed by ratification by three-quarters of the states), and
  • the innovative “three-state strategy” (ratification in three more of the 15 state legislatures that did not ratify the ERA in 1972-82, based on legal analysis that when three more states vote yes, this process could withstand legal challenge and accomplish ratification of the ERA)

I drag this out of the dust bin of history because the ratification process is NOT dead and after a recent vote there is only one state short of ratification…..

Illinois has ratified the Equal Rights Amendment a mere 36 years after the deadline for ratification, 46 years after it passed Congress, and 97 years after it was introduced. The amendment, which calls for men and women to have equal rights under state and federal law, was approved by 35 of the necessary 38 states when the deadline passed in 1982, CNN reports. Nevada finally approved it in 2017 and advocates hope it will finally be added to the Constitution if one more state ratifies it, though five states have rescinded their original ratifications, meaning there could be a legal battle even if the magic number of 38 is reached, Reuters reports. The amendment failed in Virginia’s legislature earlier this year.

The measure passed the Illinois House with a single vote to spare in a victory that NPR calls a “stark turnaround” for the home state of conservative Phyllis Schlafly, an anti-feminist activist who campaigned against the ERA in the ’70s. “Years in the making, yesterday’s vote in Illinois brings us one step closer,” says Lenora Lapidus, director of the ACLU Women’s Rights Project. “We look forward to more progress being made, and ensuring that women are explicitly protected against discrimination.” With calls to revive the amendment growing stronger amid the #MeToo movement, Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney plans to hold a congressional hearing on the ERA next week. It will be the first since 1984.

Which state will be the history maker….which state will bring about the ratification of the ERA?

That’s it for me guys…..peace out…..chuq