"...........any who have designs contrary to the support and continuation of the United States, as intended by the Framers, and described herein, are inconsistent with the purpose of the country, and, as such, are against the Constitution and should be deemed unacceptable and unwanted visitors."
***********************************
In some research for another article (The Fourteenth Article in Amendment to the Constitution),
I ran across a rather enlightening revelation. It was, just 60 years
after the Constitution, a clear and concise definition of just (and
only) who the "We the People", in the Preamble to the Constitution,
really are.
Now, most of
us will assume that any citizen of the United States is one of, "We the
People". I must admit that until recently, I, too, believed this to be
the case.
Regardless of
the (political) correctness of this assumption, we must understand that
the law is what it was intended to be, not what we might want it to be.
There is only one means by which that can be changed, and that is the
amendment process defined in Article V, of the Constitution.
i read this a while back, interesting stuff.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. Taney was a brilliant man, but chastised because of this decision. His battles with the Tyrant are most interesting.
ReplyDeleteHis most interesting, as far as challenging the Tyrant, is Ex Parte Merryman. It was a Habeas Corpus case in 1861.
DeleteJust refreshed myself on that and it is exceedingly good. Lincoln ignored it and the man was never brought to trial and released. Sounds like our present dictator........:)
DeleteRight. Lincoln refused to respond, but within a couple of months, released most of those held without benefit of Habeas Corpus.
DeleteTaney pointed out that he had no means to enforce the ruling of the court.
You might find the Habeas Corpus interesting, http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/HC00.htm then the Docket 13- 5008
DeleteThanks, I'll check it out and I imagine you are familiar with the grandson of Francis Scott Key.
DeleteThe Grandson Of Francis Scott Key Arrested By Lincoln
http://www.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=92&highlight=key
Disregard the source (Justice Taney), and consider the arguments -- the merit of what he said.
ReplyDeleteOthers who have said, "Oh, that's just Taney" cannot refute his arguments It just happened that when this case came up, he was the Justice who wrote the decision. If it were another Justice, I doubt that it would, at that time, have been much different. I hold that it still exists, and expressed by Taney.
cannot refute his arguments
Deleteit still exists, and expressed
Oh, I agree 1001%, Sir.:)