Go to: => TOP Page;   What's New? Page;   ROAD MAP;   Shopping Mall;   Emmaus Ministries Page;   Search Page

The Judiciary is NOT the Problem...!

Email by John Haskins

[COMMENT:   An excellent piece by John Haskins on the disaster upon us as the Judiciary continues to be installed and entrenched as our oligarchy.

I have just recently (July 08) been made aware of this terrible situation.  For more, go to Conservative Collapse.   E. Fox]

From: John Haskins
To: W
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 5:30 PM
Subject: Urgent concerns about the impact of your recent commentary

Mr. W,
In regards to your recent commentary which unfortunately repeats the catastrophic error being parroted by much of the "conservative" and "pro-family" establishment -- namely that judges have "legalized" or even effectively legalized homosexual "marriage" (and abortion, pornography, and outlawed prayer in schools, etc.) -- it is urgent that you consult with a qualified constitutional scholar who is equipped to thoroughly debunk the desperately misguided consensus view of the conservative establishment.  For the sake of our dying republic I urge you respectfully but in the strongest possible terms to emphatically repudiate this fatal myth before the republic is stone cold in the grave. 
In their fetish for social acceptance and respectability among the anti-constitutional, anti-rule of law, anti-Christian, anti-family nihilist left, virtually the entire "conservative" elites have abandoned the very core principles of our constitutions and flouted the grave warnings of the likes of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote:
To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. ...The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.[45]
Alexander Hamilton wrote:
“...the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution. … [T]he judiciary … has no influence over either the sword or purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL..."
Furthermore,  Hamilton observed that the Court has no means of enforcing its decisions -- making it obvious that the executive and legislative branches are not compelled to "obey" false or even dubious opinions. Hamilton is considered perhaps the strongest advocate of the right of "judicial review."  But neither he nor any other Founder imagined in it a form that compels the other two branches of government to blind obedience!  What, otherwise, would have been Hamilton's point in reassuring Americans that judges will be prevented from becoming tyrants by the fact that they cannot enforce their opinions?
Not a single signer of the Constitution (or the Declaration of Independence) would have taken seriously the purportedly "conservative" view today that to restrain judges we need to wait until we have somehow replaced them through attrition over decades of uninterrupted success in state and federal elections.  Bear in mind the sobering fact that Reagan and Bush gave us Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter, and that not a single justice today holds to an inalienable right to life in the womb!  Not Scalia, not Clarence Thomas! The view pushed by Jay Sekulow, Mark Levin, Mat Staver, James Bopp, Hugh Hewitt at al guarantees total victory of the far left. 
The "conservative" elites themselves have destroyed the separation of powers by actually urging our elected public servants to practice slavish obedience to judges who have stepped outside the law and are therefore speaking as ordinary citizens without constitutional authority and issuing legally void opinions!
Abraham Lincoln acknowledged that Supreme Court opinions were binding on the specific parties involved and “entitled to very high respect and consideration...by all other departments of the government.” But like the Founding Fathers, he totally rejected today's cowardly and constitutionally unfounded "conservative" consensus that judicial opinions are the law of the land:
“..if the policy of the government, upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between parties, in personal actions, the people will have ceased, to be their own rulers, having, to that extent, practically resigned their government, into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”
Consider also this:
Whether involving federal or state matters, the practice of judicial review has been marked by dynamic expansion and persistent controversy. Judicial power has been consolidated both in the superiority of the federal judiciary over the states and of the Supreme Court over the other branches of the federal government. The authority of the federal government that became centralized after the Civil War is one of the pillars of judicial review and vice versa. Justice Thurgood Marshall, in commenting on the constitutional bicentennial celebration of 1987, said that the Constitution did not survive the Civil War, but was remade following that conflict. Since the late nineteenth century, power has come to be increasingly centered in a Supreme Court that would be unrecognizable to the founding generation.
After the Revolution, the framers of the Constitution debated, and then rejected, an aspect of judicial review, the judicial veto. ... They rejected explicit judicial authority over Congress ... James Madison, for example...refused to acknowledge the authority of the judiciary over the other branches of government.  ( www.answers.com/topic/judicial-review?cat=biz-fin )

Why then, Mr. W, are we failing to throw back the enemy by demanding that every member of the executive and legislative branches fulfill their solemn oaths to uphold our constitutions rather than hide behind impotent judges as a pretext for the enslavement of the American people?  The majority of the "conservative" elites more or less united in taking us over a cliff on constitutionally groundless instructions from judges!  This is national suicide being conducted by your colleagues of the last thirty years!

We are watching our entire civilization unraveling before our eyes on a time scale that is a blink of an eye.  As a long-time firm supporter of what I believed were heroes of the "conservative movement" and the "pro-family movement," Many of us have watched in shock, horror and sadness since the Goodridge decision as our side's lawyers, leaders and pundits have literally leap-frogged over the far left in their eagerness to legitimate the wholesale cancellation of constitutionalism by Mitt Romney and now Arnold Schwarzenegger.  Why are self-styled "conservatives" spreading these  bizarre assertions that judges have powers that the American people have never given them?
The "conservative" elites are putting the final nail in our coffin. They are completing the conspiracy of many decades to use the legal profession and the courts to impose a dark age of dictatorship. They are foolishly handing absolute power to anti-Christian, anti-family revolutionaries behind the thin veil of electoral democracy.
This is where the  trajectory of the post-constitutional pragmatism undergirding the "conservative revolution" has taken us.   It is the only destination to which it could have taken us.  There was no other possible outcome than total defeat on every issue and on every front.  The Founding Fathers told us so.  We have blindly followed arrogant mercenary "legal experts" who know little or nothing of constitutions and who not only ignore the Founding Fathers but also dismiss as quacks today's true constitutional experts, such as Professors Hadley Arkes, Robert George, and Herbert Titus, Dr. Alan Keyes and many others. 
Many of those with whom you, Mr. W, have worked side by side for many years are -- mostly inadvertently -- aggressively aiding the far left in the destruction of America. There will be no stopping the rise of this dictatorship without presidents, governors, legislatures and prominent citizens calling the bluff of impotent judges as Jefferson did and asking them as President Andrew Jackson did, how they will enforce their impotent opinions. People such as yourself must break ranks with former colleagues and take a stand that exposes the heresy of judicial supremacy as an imagined justification for the likes of Romney and Schwarzenegger to violate state and federal constitutions, violate their own oaths and the sovereignty of the People. 
I have talked with dozens of lawyers, law professors and professors of jurisprudence -- including some of national renown -- about what we are seeing.  You must know that serious experts in constitutional law are shaking their heads in horror and sadness at the spectacle of Jay Sekulow, Mark Levin, Hugh Hewitt, Ann Coulter, James Bopp, the Alliance Defense Fund, the Liberty Counsel and all those who have followed them over the cliff as they slavishly parrot the absurd claim that judges have legalized homosexual "marriage" in Massachusetts and California.
Every effort that you and your lifelong friends and colleagues have invested over the years in defense of our moral fabric and our unalienable rights is now being surrendered with only the appearance of a fight because of the craven groveling of our side's self-styled "constitutional experts" before judges -- who generally have not even asserted nearly so much tyrannical authority as Jay Sekulow, Mat Staver, Mark Levin, James Dobson, Tony Perkins and others have granted them.
I earnestly plead with you to examine this core issue with urgency and make it your highest priority to analyze and then publicly state exactly where the entire conservative movement went wrong in their broad concession of power to judges that the people never granted them.  What I am telling you implies a kind of systematic and widespread malpractice at the highest levels of the conservative movement over many years. This is a very difficult reality to accept for all of us.  But we will either face it, sound the alarm and retrace our steps to clear and inflexible boundaries on judges that are constitutional and within which a democratic republic with unalienable rights can be defended and preserved, or we will fall, as the Founding Fathers so powerfully warned, into the abyss of a dark and cruel night of tyranny:
The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is the quintessential and most lucid and forceful statement in all of American law of the boundaries that We the People have placed upon the judiciary, which has no lawful role whatsoever in the shaping of public policy, but merely applying laws as originally ratified to specific cased before them. 
"The power of suspending the laws, or the execution of the laws, ought never to be exercised but by the legislature..."  (PART THE FIRST, Article XX.) 
"[T]he people...are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent." (PART THE FIRST, Article X.) 

"The judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men." (PART THE FIRST, Article XXX.) 

"All the laws which have heretofore been adopted, used and approved … shall still remain and be in full force, until altered or repealed by the legislature…" (PART THE SECOND, Article VI.) 

Mr. W, those who are at the helm of the conservative movement are tragically ignorant and in fact inoculated against the most fundamental principles of separation of powers that were designed to utterly prevent the oxymoron of "judicial tyranny" from being used to deceive us. For years the America legal profession has indoctrinated and brainwashed every lawyer in law school (and throughout their careers) in exactly the manner that the Soviet communists indoctrinated their own lawyers, economists, sociologists, etc. This is understood by the top constitutional scholars in the country such as Professors Hadley Arkes, Robert George and Herbert Titus. 

Please examine this myth critically and call all those around the country who respect your many years of work to join you in demanding a return to the constitutional separation of powers established by the Founding Fathers in our state and federal constitutions.

On this and many related topics, I strongly recommend Professor Titus' book "God, Man and the Law" (or, if you prefer, his audio recording of it in a CD series with the same title -- see below). I would be pleased to put you in contact with Dean Titus and other constitutional scholars who can affirm the points I am making here.  Please also feel free to contact me for any questions or discussion.

Very cordially,

John Haskins
and The Parents' Rights Coalition


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Go to: => TOP Page;   Spiritual Warfare;   Politics;   ROAD MAP

Date Posted -  --/--/2008   -   Date Last Edited - 09/15/2012