Florida, the Federal Court System, and the Constitution
I received this recently and thought I would post it today as a bonus.
“President’s Day
I was eating lunch on the 20th of February with my 10-year-old granddaughter and I asked her, ‘What day is tomorrow?’
She said ‘It’s President’s Day!’
She is a smart kid.
I asked ‘What does President’s Day mean?’
I was waiting for something about Washington or Lincoln ... etc.
She replied, ‘President’s Day is when President Obama steps out of the White House, and if he sees his shadow we have one more year of unemployment.’
You know, it hurts when hot coffee spurts out your nose …”
From: http://www.fox10tv.com/dpp/news/florida/gov-scott-signs-welfare-drug-testing-bill
“Gov. Scott signs welfare drug testing bill
Debate begins all across Florida
Updated: Wednesday, 01 Jun 2011, 10:09 PM CDT
Published : Wednesday, 01 Jun 2011, 3:43 PM CDT
Russell Colburn
PENSACOLA, Fla. (WALA)—Florida House Bill 353 is spurring quite the debate around the sunshine state, as welfare beneficiaries will soon be subject to drug tests.
The new law requires tests to be conducted on those applying for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or TANF benefits, which currently cover over 93,000, according to the Department of Children and Families.
The tests will be paid for by those receiving aid. If they pass, they’ll be reimbursed. However, if they fail the test, they'll lose not only their money, but their benefits too. Some said that’s perfectly fair.
‘I have no problems with it, I mean, if they’re doing drugs then they obviously have to pay the consequences,’ said Janae Carnley.
‘I think welfare is a great idea, but I think too many people take advantage of it. A lot of people use it just to buy their drugs. They misuse it completely,’ said Josh Green.
Henry Coe already receives disability benefits. Since this doesn’t start until July, Coe is grandfathered in, but that doesn’t mean he’s without his doubts. His biggest concern is what to do with those after they fail the tests.
‘There’s no drug or alcohol treatment that they get referred to, and they just end up going back out on the street? So do they end up going to jail, where we pay more money to keep them in jail? It just doesn’t seem cost effective,’ Coe said.
Susan Watson, regional director of the American Civil Liberties Union, finds the new law intrusive.
‘I think it’s a huge invasion of their privacy. (Don’t companies do drug tests? Don’t schools do drug tests? These possible recipients of State money are seeking money from the State of Florida. It’s not a “right” to receive “free” money from a State is it? Why should Florida just give money to people without some requirements that help insure that that money isn’t going to be used, for example, to BUY MORE DRUGS!—my addition) Not only do they have to submit their bodily fluids for testing, but they have to send a list of any medications they’re on. (Why is the list of medications required? Could it be to help insure the accuracy of the drug tests?—my addition) That’s none of the government’s business,’ (It is if the individual wants State money. They have a choice. The ACLU is suppose to be big on choice, you know. They do NOT have a “right” to “free” State money!—my addition) said Watson.
According to Watson, Florida conducted an experimental test, finding that drug usage among welfare recipients was no different than drug usage in the regular population. (The difference, of course, is that the regular population is NOT seeking “free” State money!—my addition)
A similar law passed in Michigan in the late 1990s. In that case, a long legal battle led to the conclusion that drug testing those on welfare was unconstitutional.” (Doesn’t make the decision accurate or Constitutional! Who made the original decision—an inferior federal court?—my addition)
From: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2011/06/01/2011-06-01_florida_gov_rick_scott_signs_law_requiring_welfare_recipients_to_take_drug_test_.html
“Florida Gov. Rick Scott signs law requiring welfare recipients to take drug test, ACLU objects
BY Aliyah Shahid
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Wednesday, June 1st 2011, 11:36 AM
Florida Governor Rick Scott signed a bill on Tuesday that would require welfare recipients to take a mandatory drug test.
If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free.
Republican Governor Rick Scott signed a bill on Tuesday that requires benefit recipients to undergo drug testing.
Applicants for the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program who test positive for illicit substances won’t be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment. (How about that? Treatment is part of the program!—my addition)
Those who fail a second time would be banned from receiving the funds for three years.
‘While there are certainly legitimate needs for public assistance, it is unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction,’ (Absolutely correct!—my addition) Scott said. ‘This new law will encourage personal accountability (That’s a novel concept!—my addition) and will help to prevent the misuse of tax dollars.’ (Another novel concept!—my addition)
If welfare candidates pass the drug screening, they’ll be reimbursed for the test.
The legislation instantly came under a barrage of criticism from the American Civil
Liberties Union (Of course!—my addition) and several of the Sunshine State’s Democrats (Of course!—my addition). They argued the bill is an invasion of privacy. (Don’t want your “privacy” invaded; don’t seek “free” State money!—my addition)
‘The wasteful program created by this law subjects Floridians who are impacted by the economic downturn, as well as their families, to a humiliating search of their urine and body fluids without cause or even suspicion of drug abuse,’ (It’s call prevention! This is not a criminal case. It’s a “I want ‘free’ money” situation. States and the federal government have requirements all the time to receive “free” money. This is simply a reasonable requirement to receive government assistance!—my addition) said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida.
‘Searching the bodily fluids of those in need of assistance is a scientifically, fiscally, and constitutionally unsound policy. (According to whom? The ACLU? The baby MURDERERS! Don’t make me laugh! The ACLU has no concept of scientific, fiscally sound, and/or Constitutional policy!—my addition) Today, that unsound policy is Florida law.’ (GOOD! It is about time! It‘s called making people RESPONSIBLE for their actions!—my addition)
The law, which will be enacted July 1, is likely to be challenged. A similar bill was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court in Michigan in 2003. (That’s what I wanted to emphasis! Another inferior federal court violating the Constitution of the United States. The very Constitution that every member of the federal courts has taken an oath to uphold!—my addition)
ashahid@nydailynews.com
With News Wire Services”
This story had a question associated with it. Here is the question and the % of the “yes,” “no,” and “not sure” answers at the time I voted. I voted YES! This, of course, is NOT a scientific poll.
“Conditional welfare:
Do you think welfare recipients should be tested for illegal drug use?
Yes. It will make sure taxpayers aren’t subsidizing drug use. Yes = 86%
No. This is unconstitutional. No = 13% (I doubt if these voters know what the Constitution says in this area! Unconstitutional is easy to claim. Claiming it doesn’t make it true!—my addition)
I’m not sure. 1%”
Another instance where those claiming a Constitutional violate will, themselves, violate the Constitution by taking the case to a inferior federal court contrary to the Constitution of the United States!
For as I’ve said repeatedly, NO inferior federal court judge has jurisdiction over a State. NONE! The Constitution of the United States of America clearly states in Article III, Section 2, ¶ 2: “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.” Who has jurisdiction when a State is a party to the case? The United States Supreme Court!!! And only the United States Supreme Court until and unless the Constitution is amended!!! An inferior federal court has no such jurisdiction! The inferior federal courts in the United States have NO jurisdiction over States! NONE!!!
It’s time, it is past time to TAKE BACK THE NATION!!! It’s time, it past time to be obedient to the Constitution of the United States!!! It’s time, it is past time to TAKE BACK THE NATION!!!
I received this recently and thought I would post it today as a bonus.
“President’s Day
I was eating lunch on the 20th of February with my 10-year-old granddaughter and I asked her, ‘What day is tomorrow?’
She said ‘It’s President’s Day!’
She is a smart kid.
I asked ‘What does President’s Day mean?’
I was waiting for something about Washington or Lincoln ... etc.
She replied, ‘President’s Day is when President Obama steps out of the White House, and if he sees his shadow we have one more year of unemployment.’
You know, it hurts when hot coffee spurts out your nose …”
From: http://www.fox10tv.com/dpp/news/florida/gov-scott-signs-welfare-drug-testing-bill
“Gov. Scott signs welfare drug testing bill
Debate begins all across Florida
Updated: Wednesday, 01 Jun 2011, 10:09 PM CDT
Published : Wednesday, 01 Jun 2011, 3:43 PM CDT
Russell Colburn
PENSACOLA, Fla. (WALA)—Florida House Bill 353 is spurring quite the debate around the sunshine state, as welfare beneficiaries will soon be subject to drug tests.
The new law requires tests to be conducted on those applying for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or TANF benefits, which currently cover over 93,000, according to the Department of Children and Families.
The tests will be paid for by those receiving aid. If they pass, they’ll be reimbursed. However, if they fail the test, they'll lose not only their money, but their benefits too. Some said that’s perfectly fair.
‘I have no problems with it, I mean, if they’re doing drugs then they obviously have to pay the consequences,’ said Janae Carnley.
‘I think welfare is a great idea, but I think too many people take advantage of it. A lot of people use it just to buy their drugs. They misuse it completely,’ said Josh Green.
Henry Coe already receives disability benefits. Since this doesn’t start until July, Coe is grandfathered in, but that doesn’t mean he’s without his doubts. His biggest concern is what to do with those after they fail the tests.
‘There’s no drug or alcohol treatment that they get referred to, and they just end up going back out on the street? So do they end up going to jail, where we pay more money to keep them in jail? It just doesn’t seem cost effective,’ Coe said.
Susan Watson, regional director of the American Civil Liberties Union, finds the new law intrusive.
‘I think it’s a huge invasion of their privacy. (Don’t companies do drug tests? Don’t schools do drug tests? These possible recipients of State money are seeking money from the State of Florida. It’s not a “right” to receive “free” money from a State is it? Why should Florida just give money to people without some requirements that help insure that that money isn’t going to be used, for example, to BUY MORE DRUGS!—my addition) Not only do they have to submit their bodily fluids for testing, but they have to send a list of any medications they’re on. (Why is the list of medications required? Could it be to help insure the accuracy of the drug tests?—my addition) That’s none of the government’s business,’ (It is if the individual wants State money. They have a choice. The ACLU is suppose to be big on choice, you know. They do NOT have a “right” to “free” State money!—my addition) said Watson.
According to Watson, Florida conducted an experimental test, finding that drug usage among welfare recipients was no different than drug usage in the regular population. (The difference, of course, is that the regular population is NOT seeking “free” State money!—my addition)
A similar law passed in Michigan in the late 1990s. In that case, a long legal battle led to the conclusion that drug testing those on welfare was unconstitutional.” (Doesn’t make the decision accurate or Constitutional! Who made the original decision—an inferior federal court?—my addition)
From: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2011/06/01/2011-06-01_florida_gov_rick_scott_signs_law_requiring_welfare_recipients_to_take_drug_test_.html
“Florida Gov. Rick Scott signs law requiring welfare recipients to take drug test, ACLU objects
BY Aliyah Shahid
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Wednesday, June 1st 2011, 11:36 AM
Florida Governor Rick Scott signed a bill on Tuesday that would require welfare recipients to take a mandatory drug test.
If Floridians want welfare, they better make sure they are drug-free.
Republican Governor Rick Scott signed a bill on Tuesday that requires benefit recipients to undergo drug testing.
Applicants for the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program who test positive for illicit substances won’t be eligible for the funds for a year, or until they undergo treatment. (How about that? Treatment is part of the program!—my addition)
Those who fail a second time would be banned from receiving the funds for three years.
‘While there are certainly legitimate needs for public assistance, it is unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize drug addiction,’ (Absolutely correct!—my addition) Scott said. ‘This new law will encourage personal accountability (That’s a novel concept!—my addition) and will help to prevent the misuse of tax dollars.’ (Another novel concept!—my addition)
If welfare candidates pass the drug screening, they’ll be reimbursed for the test.
The legislation instantly came under a barrage of criticism from the American Civil
Liberties Union (Of course!—my addition) and several of the Sunshine State’s Democrats (Of course!—my addition). They argued the bill is an invasion of privacy. (Don’t want your “privacy” invaded; don’t seek “free” State money!—my addition)
‘The wasteful program created by this law subjects Floridians who are impacted by the economic downturn, as well as their families, to a humiliating search of their urine and body fluids without cause or even suspicion of drug abuse,’ (It’s call prevention! This is not a criminal case. It’s a “I want ‘free’ money” situation. States and the federal government have requirements all the time to receive “free” money. This is simply a reasonable requirement to receive government assistance!—my addition) said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida.
‘Searching the bodily fluids of those in need of assistance is a scientifically, fiscally, and constitutionally unsound policy. (According to whom? The ACLU? The baby MURDERERS! Don’t make me laugh! The ACLU has no concept of scientific, fiscally sound, and/or Constitutional policy!—my addition) Today, that unsound policy is Florida law.’ (GOOD! It is about time! It‘s called making people RESPONSIBLE for their actions!—my addition)
The law, which will be enacted July 1, is likely to be challenged. A similar bill was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court in Michigan in 2003. (That’s what I wanted to emphasis! Another inferior federal court violating the Constitution of the United States. The very Constitution that every member of the federal courts has taken an oath to uphold!—my addition)
ashahid@nydailynews.com
With News Wire Services”
This story had a question associated with it. Here is the question and the % of the “yes,” “no,” and “not sure” answers at the time I voted. I voted YES! This, of course, is NOT a scientific poll.
“Conditional welfare:
Do you think welfare recipients should be tested for illegal drug use?
Yes. It will make sure taxpayers aren’t subsidizing drug use. Yes = 86%
No. This is unconstitutional. No = 13% (I doubt if these voters know what the Constitution says in this area! Unconstitutional is easy to claim. Claiming it doesn’t make it true!—my addition)
I’m not sure. 1%”
Another instance where those claiming a Constitutional violate will, themselves, violate the Constitution by taking the case to a inferior federal court contrary to the Constitution of the United States!
For as I’ve said repeatedly, NO inferior federal court judge has jurisdiction over a State. NONE! The Constitution of the United States of America clearly states in Article III, Section 2, ¶ 2: “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.” Who has jurisdiction when a State is a party to the case? The United States Supreme Court!!! And only the United States Supreme Court until and unless the Constitution is amended!!! An inferior federal court has no such jurisdiction! The inferior federal courts in the United States have NO jurisdiction over States! NONE!!!
It’s time, it is past time to TAKE BACK THE NATION!!! It’s time, it past time to be obedient to the Constitution of the United States!!! It’s time, it is past time to TAKE BACK THE NATION!!!
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 5:44 AM
<< Home