Controversial “Roe v. Wade” Movie Reveals Truth About Infamous Supreme Court Case

November 5, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

The upcoming controversial movie Roe v. Wade is projected to open in theaters the winter of 2019. The feature-length movie, produced by actor and producer Nick Loeb, is the true account of the infamous 1973 Supreme Court case that overturned states’ rights, legalizing abortion throughout the country and altering the course of the nation.

The film will not only unveil the truth of the abortion industry, but also its agenda. According to the movie’s gofundme website, “Roe v. Wade is the untold story of how people lied, how the media lied, and how the courts were manipulated to pass a law that has since killed over 60 Million Americans.”

Source: Controversial “Roe v. Wade” Movie Reveals Truth About Infamous Supreme Court Case

Supreme Court Takes Case That Could End Internet Censorship, Expand First Amendment | Zero Hedge

October 18, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

The United States Supreme Court has agreed to take a case that could change free speech on the Internet forever.

Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, No. 17-702, the case that it has agreed to take, will decide if the private operator of a public access network is considered a state actor, CNBC reported.

The case could affect how companies like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Google and YouTube are governed. If the Court were to issue a far-reaching ruling it could subject such companies to First Amendment lawsuits and force them to allow a much broader scope of free speech from its users.

Source: Supreme Court Takes Case That Could End Internet Censorship, Expand First Amendment | Zero Hedge

Who Made the Supreme Court King? | | Tenth Amendment Center

September 29, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

For the last 100 years, most Americans have assumed the federal court system, and ultimately the Supreme Court, stands as the final arbiter in any constitutional controversy. But who made the federal courts king?

The Constitution certainly didn’t. Take a moment and go look for the clause in the Constitution that delegates to the Supreme Court the power to serve as the sole and final authority on what is or isn’t constitutional. You won’t find it, because it does not exist.  The Constitution tasks the Court with “judging cases.”

So, who placed the Supreme Court at the pinnacle of Constitutional interpretation?

Why, the Supreme Court itself did!

Source: Who Made the Supreme Court King? | | Tenth Amendment Center

Failure of Supreme Court Opinions

July 11, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Now that Brett Kavanaugh has been selected by President Trump to be the next Supreme Court Justice, the gladiator games of the confirmation process begins. Much of the attention will focus on the bitter hysteria that the Never Trump lunatics exhibit as they regress even further into denial. Those supporters who demand a Living Constitution are in a panic. They see the gains they have made over decades are fading with a court of Originalists and fear that Textualism will become the standard for the Supreme Court. The self-proclaimed enlightened zealots contend they are social justice warriors. In actuality they protect the corrupt institutions, practices and policies that progressives profess they oppose.

Read the entire article on the Reign of Terror archives

Is a Trump Court in the Making? | Patrick J. Buchanan – Official Website

July 10, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

If Mitch McConnell’s Senate can confirm his new nominee for the Supreme Court, President Donald Trump may have completed the capture of all three branches of the U.S. government for the Republican Party.

Not bad for a rookie.

And the lamentations on the left are surely justified.

For liberalism’s great strategic ally and asset of 60 years, the judicial dictatorship erected by Earl Warren and associates, may be about to fall.

Source: Is a Trump Court in the Making? | Patrick J. Buchanan – Official Website

The SUPREME COURT – A MISTAKE THE PRESIDENT SHOULD AVOID | Roger Stone | Stone Cold Truth

July 8, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Needless to say, I will support any candidate selected by President Trump for the Supreme Court. That said, I have grave reservations that Judge Brett Kavanagh is another David Souter or John Roberts- both of whom were appointed by Bush presidents and both of whom joined the liberal block on the court on key issues where their decisions hurt America.

Put aside the question of whether Clinton lawyer Vince Foster was murdered or died by his own hand; there is substantial credible evidence that Foster’s body was moved and that prosecutor Brett Kavanaugh ran a veritable terror campaign against an inconvenient witness who’s honest testimony would contradict the findings of the Special Counsel for home Kavanaugh worked.

Source: The SUPREME COURT – A MISTAKE THE PRESIDENT SHOULD AVOID | Roger Stone | Stone Cold Truth

Supreme Court: Government Unions Can’t Collect Dues From Non-members

June 29, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

While working a summer job during my college days in the paint shop of Halliburton (we had a lot of red and gray paint) in my hometown of Duncan, Oklahoma, I became involved in a conversation with a strong union advocate. I told him that I thought it was wrong for labor unions to get involved in political issues and campaigns, using forced union dues, because often the issues had little to nothing to do with working conditions for their members.

I specifically cited that the unions had supported Senator George McGovern’s presidential campaign in the most recent election, and that he had lost 49 states. Literally millions of union members had not supported the same candidate as the union bosses. That did not matter, he told me, as some workers are just not smart enough to know what is good for them, and the union leaders (such as himself) must protect them from their own ignorance.

Source: Supreme Court: Government Unions Can’t Collect Dues From Non-members

Tenth Amendment Center | Supreme Court Offers Opinion, Doesn’t Make Law

June 28, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Whenever state laws are overturned by the Supreme Court, such decisions are often cited as repudiation against any sort of argument for their legitimacy. While case law is regularly debated, the court’s constitutional power to make such reversals is rarely questioned. Courtly precedents are usually referenced in support of such actions rather than a constitutional basis.

But the power to offer opinion does not equal the power to make law. While today, most believe that Supreme Court justices carry an aura of infallibility in doing so, that perception was not always so clairvoyant.

The Constitution grants very little power to the federal judiciary for a reason. Since British history was rife with treacherous kings who packed the royal courts with those who would innately endorse their aims, the founders embraced the separation of powers doctrine espoused by Charles de Montesquieu for a reason. The judges serve for life to separate them from kingly and pragmatic interests, not for assurances of power.

Source: Tenth Amendment Center | Supreme Court Offers Opinion, Doesn’t Make Law

Supreme Court Rules That the U.S. Government Must Get a Warrant Before Accessing Cellphone Location Data

June 23, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

IN A LANDMARK privacy decision, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Friday that police must get a warrant in order to obtain your cellphone’s location data over an extended period of time.

The decision is a major victory for privacy advocates, who have long argued that the law has failed to keep pace with the amount of intrusive data we voluntarily hand over to private companies.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined the liberal justices on the court, declaring that even though the data is held by a third party, the government still needs a warrant to obtain it.

Source: Supreme Court Rules That the U.S. Government Must Get a Warrant Before Accessing Cellphone Location Data

Memo to Trump: Defy Mueller | Patrick J. Buchanan – Official Website

May 4, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

 

If Donald Trump does not wish to collaborate in the destruction of his presidency, he will refuse to be questioned by the FBI, or by a grand jury, or by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his malevolent minions.

Should Mueller subpoena him, as he has threatened to do, Trump should ignore the subpoena, and frame it for viewing in Trump Tower.

If Mueller goes to the Supreme Court and wins an order for Trump to comply and testify to a grand jury, Trump should defy the court.

Source: Memo to Trump: Defy Mueller | Patrick J. Buchanan – Official Website

Will Supreme Court Now Act Against Judges’ Campaign To Foil Trump Presidency?

January 18, 2018 by · Leave a Comment 

Could the fight over the Dreamers finally get the Supreme Court to put its foot down on the campaign by liberal district judges to foil Donald Trump’s presidency? It looks like we could find out.

That’s because of the announcement this week that the Trump administration will try to go back to the Supreme Court over the latest orders from a judge in San Francisco.

Read the entire report on The Sun newspaper

SCOTUS keeps lowering the BOOM on lower FED courts that have issued rulings against TRUMP – The National Sentinel

December 22, 2017 by · Leave a Comment 

SCOTUS Rules: The U.S. Supreme Court in recent weeks has overridden several lower federal courts that had issued rulings unfavorable to the Trump administration, suggesting to some legal observers that they may have been politically motivated.

The high court has issued a number of eyebrow-raising orders in cases that involved the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, and the latest iteration of President Donald J. Trump’s travel ban.

The SCOTUS rulings deal fairly harshly with these lower court rulings from federal courts in Hawaii, California, and Maryland.

Source: SCOTUS keeps lowering the BOOM on lower FED courts that have issued rulings against TRUMP – The National Sentinel

SCOTUScare from the Same-Sex Supreme Court

June 30, 2015 by · Leave a Comment 

In the long and storied past, America prided itself on being a country based upon law. Once this was true! Today, the last vestige of a society built upon natural law and incontrovertible principles is dead. The legal system is now founded on whim, political pressure and sentiment. Under such a framework, the Supreme Court has forfeited the final semblance of legitimacy. The United States no longer can claim it is a constitutional republic. The tyranny of the judiciary in not new! However, the latest decisions on Obamacare and Same-Sex marriage effectively gut the credibility and the meaning of the constitution.

Read the entire article on the “Inherent Autonomy” archives

Obamacare is a Public Requiem by Supreme Decree

June 29, 2015 by · Leave a Comment 

Do you have an absolute right to refuse medical treatment? Well, if you recognize the immutable authority of natural rights, you must defend the birthright of individuals to reject the quackery of government-imposed medicine. Common law clearly discerns that there are limits on the power of governments to force human beings into becoming pinned up sheep, against their will. Already far too many cowardly citizens are eager to comply with the next dictate of a tyrannical regime. Subsequently, when the death panels summon you into their diagnostic pool of drugs, why would you want to accept the pharmaceutical prescription for a controlled and managed demise?

Read the entire article on the “Totalitarian Collectivism” archives


"Many seek to become a Syndicated Columnist,
while the few strive to be a Vindicated Publisher"

BREAKING ALL THE RULES


eXTReMe Tracker