A Pro-Life Law Passed by a Duly Elected General Assembly Goes to an Inferior Federal Court for Adjudication

Texas Senator Ted Cruz’s Father—“We Mutually Pledge to Each Other Our Lives, Our Fortunes and Our Sacred Honor”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGURa1DfWEo#at=420

—

Coming rally in Washington D.C.—July 15^th

From: NumbersUSA www.numbersusa.com

“July 15th in Washington, D.C.: Anti-Amnesty March and Rally

Although this is not a NumbersUSA event, we are forwarding information to members who may be interested in attending.

Dear activist,

The Black American Leadership Alliance (BALA) has organized an anti-amnesty march and rally—the DC March for Jobs—in Washington, D.C. on Monday, July 15th. The goal is to ‘demand that our leaders reject amnesty, enforce immigration laws as written, and support policies that put black U.S. citizens back to work.’

As their web site notes, if the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill is enacted, it ‘will be costly for all Americans, but will harm black American workers more than any other group. Mass immigration and amnesty puts those poorest Americans from all walks of life out of work and suppresses wages, causing them to compete with aliens willing to work in poorer working conditions for cheaper pay. When 22 million Americans are either out of work or unemployed, now is no time to further over-saturate the labor force with increased immigration levels and amnesty. If Congress doesn’t stop this irresponsible legislation, the United States will continue to see more and more Americans of all races out of jobs and on the streets.’

The list of speakers for the event includes:

(Added to the speaker list are Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Steve King—two of my favorite Congressmen!)

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.)
Representative Steve King (R-Iowa)
Former Representative Alan West (Fla.);
Representative Mo Brooks (R-Ala.);
State Senate Elbert Guillory (R-La.);
Frank Morris, former Executive Director of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation;
Mike Cutler, former INS Agent; and
Dennis Michael Lynch, filmmaker .

What: DC March for Jobs
When: Monday, July 15, 2013—9:30 a.m.
Where: Starts at Freedom Plaza in Washington, DC

For more information, visit https://www.numbersusa.com/content/action/dc-march-jobs.html

Alternatively, you can call 202-349-0858 or send an email to info@blackallianceorg.org

Look for a list of State Organizers on the site. Your state may already have a delegation planning to attend.”

Aren’t you interested in seeing how the mainstream media covers this—if at all? A Black group directly challenging the Democrat Party, Barack Hussein Obama, and the Black Congressional Caucus! If only the Republican Party leadership has the good sense to invite these conservative Black leaders into the mainstream of the Republican Party—where they should be! If not, they should join the TEA Party because we are fighting for the same things! Join Lloyd Marcus and others! Become Tea Party active!

—

I have posted on http://christiangunslinger1.blogspot.com information on the recall of Senators McCain and Flake of Arizona. Get involved! Get them out of office and replaced by social and fiscal conservatives!”

—

Petition to stand for families: http://www.standforthefamily.org/sff/sign_petition.cfm

The ‘I Stand for the Family’ International Petition

“Whereas, the traditional family is increasingly under attack on a variety of fronts at the international, national, state, and local levels, and

Whereas, weakening the family will have serious negative repercussions on families, individuals and societies, and

Whereas, it will take the best efforts of all of us working together to stem the tide of family disintegration and to preserve the family,

Therefore, I pledge my support to preserve and protect the family in the arenas where I have influence. Specifically I support efforts to:

1) Strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society

2) Preserve and protect marriage as only between a man and a woman

3) Protect life before as well as after birth

4) Preserve the rights of all citizens to practice their religion as they choose so long as that does not infringe on the rights of others

5) Preserve the rights of parents to direct the moral, spiritual and intellectual upbringing of their children.”

—

Watch this Jay Leno video compilation. Now that he doesn’t have to protect the presiding tyrant:

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/07/64137-best-of-leno-nbcs-fired-funnyman-now-king-of-late-night/?utm_source=EmailElect&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=Subscriber%239861&utm_campaign=07-10-2013%20IJ%20Review

—

Today’s post is a prelude to my planned post on Monday about the newly passed Texas law preventing abortions (MURDER) 20 weeks after conception. I have not decided yet if I will post it here or at http://christiangunslinger3.blogspot.com. If I post it on 3, I will let you know on Monday.

From: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/federal-judge-blocks-wisconsin-pro-life-law-would-have-shut-down-half-of-st?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=587645077a-LifeSiteNews_com_US_Headlines_06_19_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0caba610ac-587645077a-397568157

“Federal judge blocks Wisconsin pro-life law: would have shut down half of state’s abortion clinics
by Johanna Dasteel
Wednesday Jul 10, 2013

MADISON, Wisconsin, July 10, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com)—A federal judge has halted the implementation of a new abortion restriction that was signed into law by Governor Scott Walker only a few days ago (Before it could be enforced!—my addition).

Planned Parenthood and Affiliated Medical Services filed suit against the new law on Friday, complaining that a requirement that abortionists have admitting privileges at a local hospital constitutes an unconstitutional ‘undue burden’ for women seeking abortions.

The groups cited four obstacles the law would create to abortion access in the state: the closure of half of the states’ abortion clinics (Does the law specifically close the clinics? Otherwise, this is mere speculation!—my addition), the loss of abortions after 19 weeks, the reduction of access to abortions in facilities that remain open, and the fact that women would have to drive greater distances to procure abortions (How tragic! Does it compare to the tragedy of MURDERING an unborn baby?—my addition).

Planned Parenthood and AMS admit that most of their abortionists in Wisconsin do not have admitting privileges and alleged that because of the speed with which the legislation was passed they were only able to initiate the process of reaching out to local hospitals before it went into effect. They also said they may not ever be able to get the required privileges (So sad! Too bad!—my addition).

U.S. District Judge William M. Conley sided with plaintiffs, issuing a temporary restraining order against Act 37 until the bill is evaluated by the court in a hearing scheduled for July 17.

In his decision he observed that if the law were enforced, the resultant clinic closures would mean ‘there will be no abortion providers in the State of Wisconsin north of Madison and Milwaukee (Good! And how is that even relevant?—my addition).’

He said there is a ‘troubling lack of justification (Who is to decide this? A federal judge or those duly elected by the State of Wisconsin? What has happened to representational democracy?—my addition)’ for the provision and stated there would be ‘irreparable harm (Seriously? Does the law go into effect immediately?—my addition)’ done to those women who would be prevented from having abortions in the next 10 days as a result.

He added that he believes (He believes? What about what the duly elected representatives of the State of Wisconsin believe?—my addition) ‘that State is unlikely to meet its burden of demonstrating that the admitting privileges requirement is reasonably related to promoting the health of women seeking abortions.’

Susan Armacost, Legislative Director of Wisconsin Right to Life, disagrees, saying the provision is necessary to protect women’s health.

‘Currently, when a woman experiences hemorrhaging or other life-threatening complications after an abortion in Wisconsin, the clinic puts her in an ambulance and sends her to a hospital alone where she is left to her own devices to explain her medical issues to the emergency room staff,’ she said. ‘The abortionist (MURDERER!—my addition) who performed the abortion is nowhere to be seen. This deplorable situation must change.’

Terry Huyck, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, welcomed the judge’s decision (Of course! Many judges are in their pockets either philosophically or otherwise! One day, if they do not repent, they will pay a terrible price for assisting in the MURDER of the unborn!—my addition) in a statement. ‘This ruling is a step in the right direction for the women of Wisconsin who can now continue to make their own personal, private health care decisions (MURDER IS NOT health care!—my addition),’ she said.

The other provisions of Act 37, also known as ‘Sonya’s Law,’ will remain in effect. One of those provisions requires that women seeking abortions in Wisconsin be given the opportunity to see their unborn children through an ultrasound.

Additionally, the law stipulates that fathers and grandparents of aborted children have grounds to sue the abortionist for emotional distress, even if those individuals originally provided written consent to the abortion (This I like although it does give more money to lawyers!—my addition).

Co-authored with John Jalsevac”

Let’s talk about the Constitution one more time. Every time I see information about one of these cases it makes my blood boil. It violates the Constitution of the United States from the beginning. If groups representing the people of California have no standing in the Proposition 8 case, then most assuredly this lower court federal judge has NO JUDICIAL STANDING in this case!

Once again, the Constitution of the United States declares 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. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

Furthermore, NOTHING in the United States Constitution gives ANY federal judge, including Justices of the Supreme Court, the power and/or authority to issue a temporary restraining order, injunction, or anything else against a State or any State body, or State official! NOTHING! States are sovereign bodies! They gave up some sovereignty in some areas when they ratified the Constitution. However, what ever sovereignty they gave up is listed in the Constitution. NO federal judge or Justice has the Constitutional authority to issue anything against a State.

By definition a law passed by a duly elected legislative body is legal until otherwise determined not to be. NO judge can speculate before hearing the evidence that a law is not valid! Certainly NO federal judge when dealing with a State law because no federal judge has the authority to issue a temporary restraining order, injunction, or anything else against a State. Show me in the Constitution where they have that authority! It will not happen because it is not in the Constitution.

For too long, the pro-life movement has been reactive instead of being proactive. The courts illegally and unconstitutional declared in Roe v. Wade that laws against the MURDER of unborn babies were unconstitutional. We basically accepted the decision with very little reaction except for disagreeing with the decision. Finally, we began to pass laws at the State level that trimmed the impact of the original Roe decision. Each time a law was passed to restrict the MURDER of unborn babies in some way the same thing would happen. The ACLU, Planned MURDERHOOD, or some similar group would file a suit in a lower federal court saying the law violated the Constitution. Of course, this was wrong on the surface since the Constitution does not allow for the MURDER of an unborn baby. What they really meant was that it may have violated the unconstitutional, immoral decision of the Supreme Court.

Nevertheless, the State would allow the suit to begin in the district federal court contrary to the requirement of the Constitution. Inevitably, the district court judge would issue an unconstitutional temporary restraining order, injunction, or anything else against a State to prevent the law from being enforced. And inevitable, the State would go along with the action of that federal judge. The case would eventually be decided in the district federal court and the losing side would generally appeal the decision. Eventually the case would be heard by an appellate federal court and a decision reached. Then, it would be often appealed to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court may or may not decide to hear the case. Meanwhile the legitimate law passed by a duly elected representative body IS NOT enforced! This process can take years (17+ years in the case of an Illinois law dealing with parental notification which was originally passed in 1996) and cost the States millions of dollars.

Here is a modest proposal based upon the Constitution of the Unite States as written. When a suit is brought against a State controlled by pro-life forces in an inferior federal court, that State insists that the procedure used be constitutional. In short,

1) The case MUST begin in the United States Supreme Court as required in Article III, Section 2, ¶ 2 of the United States Constitution!

2) Until the case is decided in the Supreme Court, the legally passed law of the State be enforced as written!

The Republican Party currently controls the General Assembly and the Governorship in 25 States. A lot of good for life can be done if we insist on obeying the Constitution of the United States as written!