Constitution

Pertaining to the U.S. Constitution

None Of The Above: How To Take Back Our Election Process and Make the Parties Listen to Us

"NONE OF THE ABOVE” means you have the power to decide who will hold office – not the power brokers. When the votes are tallied, if “NONE OF THE ABOVE” gets a majority of votes over any of the candidates listed, then “NONE OF THE ABOVE” wins.

Rush Was Close, But…

By Richard A Viguerie, CHQ Chairman
The White House leaking problem is bigger than an absence of loyalty to Donald Trump. I think it is the absence of loyalty to principles, especially conservative principles.

Inherently Unreasonable Administrative Subpoenas Advance Police State, Violate the Constitution

Mark J. Fitzgibbons, CNS News

It may be that use of institutionalized violations of the Fourth Amendment are far more prevalent than the relative quantity of the general warrants in their day. Wise and constitutionally principled judges since at least the 1600s, however, have recognized the dangers of the coercive and extortionate nature of search power unbridled from probable cause determined in advance by the judgment of neutral judicial officers.

Gorsuch Asks The Right Questions

Asking the right questions doesn’t mean that Justice Gorsuch will reach the right decisions in these or any future case before the Court.  However, conservatives can take encouragement that Justice Gorsuch is starting from the plain language of the Constitution and the statues Congress has passed, not the whims and fantasies of other judges.

Americans Are Losing Their Independence, Must Get Gov’t Under Control

Ed Feulner, CNS News

It is clearly impractical to demand that the federal government immediately withdraw from education, health care, and all the other areas in which its current vast presence is, to the minds of many conservatives, clearly unconstitutional. It is too late, as well as politically impossible, to try to lock that barn door. The intruders are already acting like owners. But we can, and must, try to keep the remaining horses under local control.

Selective Blindness Or Conspiracy Of Anti-Trump Judges?

Our friend Michael Patrick Leahy has shown that there’s more than willful blindness behind the bizarre rulings against President Trump's Executive Orders on travel from terrorism hotspots. There’s a potential conspiracy involving Democrat holdovers at the Department of Homeland Security, Muslim sympathizers in the media and the shadowy “immigrant rights” groups and Democratic state Attorneys General that have brought the lawsuits to overturn the President’s Executive Order.

Get Judges And Private Organizations Out Of Refugee Resettlement

The notion that an unelected federal judge could order the President and Congress to admit a given number of foreigners and order the States to support with welfare and education benefits however many refugees a private organization chose to send them defies so many constitutional limits that it is hard to even begin to count them.

Another Reason To Impeach Anti-Trump Judge Theodore Chuang

The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution’s Due Process Clause to require judges to act impartially and with the appearance of impartiality. The conduct of Judge Chuang raises serious questions about his impartiality. We urge Congress to hold hearings on Judge Chuang's impeachment at its earliest opportunity.

Another Reason To Impeach Some Federal Judges

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinions in Heller and McDonald, many of the most liberal lower federal courts have flaunted Heller and the clear language of the Constitution and have been making up their own anti-constitutional rules restricting the Second Amendment.

America’s Biggest Lawbreaker versus Donald Trump

As we wrote in The Law That Governs Government, efforts by bureaucrats within the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Education, and even the Justice Department and national security infrastructure to undermine the Trump administration are signs that the administrative state is openly hostile to the constitutional rule of law.

Happy Birthday to Our Greatest President

Robert Zapesochny, The American Spectator

If Washington had not been president, it is possible a civil war could have occurred several decades earlier. Washington proved that the ability to bring change to this country requires trust. It’s a lesson worth recalling today, as trust in government has steadily eroded over the decades. By 2015, trust in government fell to 19 percent. Neither party today can make any big changes without trust. How can they regain it? For starters, by going back to our first presidency and pondering how George Washington had earned it, what it means to have it, and what it takes to keep it.

Tennessee Star: Nashville to Host Impeach Rogue Judges Rally

“We will urge our Representatives [in the United States House of Representatives] to impeach, and for the Senate to try, convict, and remove [Federal District] Judge James Robart in Washington and [Federal District] Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia,” The Spirit of America Rally organizer Mark Skoda told our friends at the TennesseeStar.com.

Thank Judges Robart and Brinkema When This Comes to America

The need for “extreme vetting” of supposed “refugees” from failed states and terrorist hotspots is demonstrated almost daily in the media, should Judges like Leonie Brinkema and James L. Robart choose to take judicial notice of such news reports. A particularly frightening example was recently revealed during the trial in Sweden of an asylum-seeking war criminal.

Another Federal Judge Seizes Presidential Power

If terrorism, as proven in the same court house where Judge Brinkema sits on the bench, isn’t a “rational basis” for President Trump’s Executive Order 13,769 then what, in the Judge’s eyes, would justify pausing immigration from a country known to harbor people hostile to the United States? The answer, of course, is that it is not Judge Brinkema’s role in our federal republic to make such decisions, it is the President’s constitutional prerogative to do so.

Actually, Trump has a duty to ban dangerous immigrants

Seth Lipsky, New York Post

One part of the Constitution — Article IV, Section 4 — lists the few things the government must do, whether it wants to or not. These are the obligations clauses. One of the obligations is that the United States “shall protect” each state “against invasion.” Not “can” protect but “shall.” So if President Trump thinks infiltration by the Islamic State amounts to any kind of invasion, he has to act. That’s never been invoked, but, hey, there’s a first time for everything.

No Law But Liberalism

George Neumayr, The American Spectator

The left glorifies anarchy in the language of the “living constitution” and other noble-sounding rhetoric, but it all amounts to the rejection of the rule of law in favor of the rule of men, who feel free to disobey every decree, save their own. In the subversive tweets and mixed-messages to the rioters, in the cheerleading for defiant judges and bureaucrats, in the award-show antics, even in its childish delight in cheap SNL parodies, the ruling class is rekindling its lawless youth.