How can the Constitution of the United States so easily be discarded?
Posted: Sunday, March 01, 2009
by Citizen4Change
If the United States Constitution clearly states something as being forbidden, why is it that even governors are able to circumvent being found guilty of violating their oath of office when they enact or allow laws which clearly violate the constitution?
In a simple way of looking at things, when an article in the constitution, such as
No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.
It would seem to mean that no one, not a judge, not congress, not even the president of the United States of America can pass neither a bill of attainder nor an ex post facto law.
If a person honors and upholds the constitution, then they would be barred totally from enacting any sort of ex post facto law or bill of attainder.
Case in point.
Governor Piyush Jindal took an oath of office:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution and laws of the United States and the constitution and laws of this state and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me according to the best of my ability and understanding, so help me God.
At the same time, the state in which he is governor has a constitution which states:
Article 1, Section 23. Prohibited Laws
No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be enacted.
If Piyush Jindal took an oath to support both the United States Constitution, and also the Constitution of Louisiana, how is he upholding the constitutions by supporting the Retroactive, Ex Post Facto application of the Sex Offender Registration laws in Louisiana.
How can Piyush Jindal, Governor of Louisiana continue to persecute the lives of those who have satisfied all terms of their 20, 30, 40 year old convictions when clearly the constitution forbids doing so?
Many people do not even know what a Bill of Attainder or an Ex Post Facto Law is. A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial. The United States Constitution forbids both the federal and state governments to enact bills of attainder, in Article 1, Sections 9 and 10, respectively.
That is exactly what these Sex Offender Registries do. In some cases, they dredge up persons who have committed a crime and served their sentence 10, 20, 30 years ago, and without taking them to court, sentence them to Lifetime Sex Offender Registration with all the Punishments and restrictions..
Once on the registry, these people, these persons who are now among the new underclass of people, the "SEX OFFENDERS" are subject to a whole new, daily growing list of punishments and restrictions.
One state's highest court ruled that the state cannot force a man with an unblemished record since his 1979 rape conviction to register as a sex offender without giving him a chance to argue that he should be exempt. LINK
When a person has committed 1 crime 20, 30, 100 years ago, and the state or federal government now requires that person to register as a Sex Offender based on that 20, 30 or 100 year old conviction. The state and federal government violate every person's right to due process by insisting they have a mandatory obligation to register as a Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 sex offender for the rest of their life, despite evidence that they are unlikely to re offend.
A new class of people has been created in America. The new class of American Citizens is named' "SEX OFFENDERS".
Millions are now placed into this group and the number of those who are labeled as such is growing in leaps and bounds.
Once a person is placed in this group, each city, each municipality, each state is creating countless new laws and all they have to do is apply all of these new laws to those in the group, SEX OFFENDERS. Much the same way white Americans use to have signs up all over America which read: "No Niggers allowed, Only White People in Our Establishment". Just the same way the Germans, Nazis took everything from the Jewish people and labeled them Nasty Jews.. until they ultimately Exterminated them... while the German People watched.
These American Citizen who are placed in this Sub Group, Sub Class are then denied many of their Constitutional rights.
Their privacy is totally removed as much of their Private Information is placed on the World Wide Web for the World to see.
The lives of their children and family members are at great risk for any vigilante who wishes to target them for murder or mayhem.
These people, since they are made members of this new Sub Class, are denied work, housing, friends and privacy in any way.
Teenage Children Going to Prison and being labeled Sex Offender for the rest of their lives for simply sending a nude photo of themselves over their cell phone or computer to their boy or girlfriend.
Children as young as 8 years old being arrested and charged with sex crimes for things as simple as playing, "You show me yours and I will show you mine". These children are sentence to many years of counseling at their parent's expense.. and labeled Sex Offender for the rest of their lives for doing what is normal at their age, investigating.
Women being arrested for taking, having developed or owning photos of themselves breast feeding their babies.
Men and women who committed one crime 20 or 30 years ago who have served out all their sentence for that crime are now finding that the United States Government and Local State Governments are passing Retroactive laws which heap Hundreds of new punishments upon these people who have already served out their sentences. In effect, they are Re Sentenced to Lifetime Probation. Their Constitutional Rights are being totally ignored and most do not have 30 or 50 thousand dollars to hire a lawyer to fight for their rights. The states know this and pass the unconstitutional laws anyways.
So you see, it is hard to understand how a simply written statement in the constitution can so easily be circumvented by our political and judicial leaders.
This Article has been viewed 710 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (3 total)Great article! One thing left out is this. If you have any kind of legal issue you as a US citizen have the write to go to court. You may want a lawyer or you may go pro say, but you can go and phile a motion to the court and be heard to defend yourself or clear up a matter. The only people that can't do this is the "sex offender" If you are one and you think you are being treated wrong. If you think the laws are illegal. If you think you are being punished after the fact. If you want to prove you are no risk. Oh well to bad for you. A "sex offender" does not have the right to go to court for any of this. This has been taken away as well. They can do what they want with you for the rest of your life and you have no say in it. Don't do what they say and go to prison. Still not punishment however. Why is this, think about it. If the "sex offender can go to court then this will cause many issues for the law maker as the laws are illegal. There would be so many wholes punched into there retro active laws there would be little left for them to stand on. So as a law maker how do you take care of that problem. Simple, remove there right to go to court. However as long as the law maker can keep the public thinking there is a child raper behind every tree they will continue to pass these illegal laws. Just remember this is the gov. Once you open the door a little, they will remove it from it's hindges. That means you may be next, and for what, who knows. I am a RSO because of a situation 24 years ago. I was not looking for an underage girl. I did not have sex with her. While I did go to county jail for a few months I never ever went to prison. My case was an unfortunate thing. I have never had a sex crime again ever, why, I am not interested in sex with kids........ Yet if I do not fallow all ex post facto laws and new laws every year until I die I will go to prison. I never went to prison in the first place. It was 24 years ago. I was 20 years old then. You are all paying to keep track of me and tens of thousands like me. I understand there are really bad people out there that we all want protection from. Is ruining my life, my kids life doing this for you. I hope you feel protected from me. Who will protect us all from the law maker with no regard for the law as writen by the founding fathers. They spit on it so they can say we are protecting you. You fall for it and don't care what they do. Soon enough you will simply walk down a street and a cop will demand to see your papers. Ah hell that's ok as it is for your protection, so your good with it right! The other issue is this. All the time there are new laws passed so a RSO is very restricted on the internet. Give all you emails, passwords, kicked off of my space ect. Yes I understand there are internet predatores. I am not saying there isn't. Problem I have with this is why are young kids allowed to be on such sites in the first place. Before the internet would you have put you kid in a room with thousands of books and magazines and said have at it son. Many of these books at there finger tips are porn, drugs, more porn on and on. I doubt most of you would have done this. So why do parents put there kids in these rooms today. Ah yes the fire wall and such that most savy kids get around very easily, or use a pc some place else. You set the kid up for trouble. Everything is new to them and they want to investigate most of it. Why is there not a proper age for kids to join these sites? Why are they allowed spend so much time in the room of infinate information and all walks of people. Answer- first it is the perfect baby sitter for you. When I was a kid the baby sitter was the black and white tv or board games. When my kids were little it was a video or simple electronic game. Now it is the internet and all that comes with it. Second this is big business and huge money for these co. Anytime you have big business and money you have the lobbiest and the politician. So instead of losing all that money by not allowing kids to be on these things lets let them loose on the internet and hope for the best. My point is responsibility goes both ways. Start parenting again and you will have less problems. The way it is now you let your kid on the internet and it is up to the law maker to protect them and parent them. Forgive me, I am just tired of having my life ruined by illegal laws that do little to protect anyone. I am tired of being lied to by the gov. I am tired of them wasting money on tracking people like me. How about you?I wish you the best off luck. I am involved in a cunundrum regarding my 70 year old brother. In his case the situation occured in 1984 and because there were mitigating circumstances he was paroled for five years. Over in 1989 NOT! My brother, the naturalized citizen will now be deported as he was picked up on a sweep after living an exemplary life, after the 1984 incident. So much for bloody justice as no matter where we turn we run into a brick wall. All those retro active laws are a travesty and we better beware as pretty soon you don't have to be a felon/sex offender to get caught by it. Try a citizen, a law abiding citizen, with something someone connected with the government may want. BEWARE!!!
I find it amazing that sex offender laws are supposedly there to protect the "public". If protecting the public was important, then people convicted of murder or acts of violence would be on the same type of list, but they are not. I could tell story after story about people I know that are on "Megan's" list because of isolated stupid acts that did not have any "victims".To those that might want to know, I am not a sex offender. I am just someone that has seen the injustice and agrees with both the author and the person above my posting.
Its well known in a higher court opinion that the measure is regulatory and civil in nature. However its a Civil law that is applied as a criminal Law and even shows up in some states statues under the criminal compiled statutes and not in the Civil statutes, which provides felony convictions for a registration process that is civil for a non infamous act. I think this would go as far to show the legislators intent on it being a criminal law vs a civil law thus being vindictive and leading to proprietorial misconduct under cannon codes of rules and regulations and a violation of the constitution 1,4,5,10, and 14th amendments. Even persons who fail to follow other registration laws dealing with other acts such as vehicle, fishing, hunting, arms registrations are all misdemeanors, while failing to registers ones own home work, school, and his/her whereabouts even however late may be a felony, and are not pushed by prosecutors under color of state law and held in equality in regard to other registries of other laws... I would think that the requirement to register certain offenses vs others do in fact create a second class of citizens by not treating them equal as a whole in regards to other convictions. I mean to register someones whereabouts would be for tracking reasoning, and the intent is for the protection of the community, but a person after serving their sentence is stated in law that they are to be released after serving their sentence on their "OWN RE-COGNIZANT" meaning on their own without any gov intrusion whatsoever. Meaning to go on their whereabouts on their own as any other free citizen. Requiring someone to register their whereabouts no matter how civil and regulatory in nature does violate their privacy when the law specifically states "OWN RE-COGNIZANT"upon release. its a grave intrusion upon the American Peoples privacy, and any intrusion however slight is a grave intrusion on the Constitution of American Liberties of Citizens. Governments do not reserve the right to track people on a blank check that they might be a threat to society based solely on a conviction alone. I think Due process requires that the Government be required to proove that one of its Citizens lacks the ability to be on their "OWN RE-COGNIZANT" thereof weather in civil or criminal acts of any kind.Hard to take you seriously, when you can't refer to the key point of your argument correctly. "In British, Canadian and American law, the term recognizance is usually employed to describe an obligation of record, entered into before some court or magistrate duly authorized, whereby the party bound acknowledges (recognizes) that s/he owes a personal debt to the government or Crown, with a defeasance, i.e. subject to a condition that the obligation to pay shall be avoided if he shall do some particular act, as if s/he shall appear at the assizes, keep the peace, or the like.Recognizance is most often encountered regarding bail in criminal cases. By filing a bail bond with the court, the defendants will usually be released from imprisonment pending a trial or appeal. If no bail has been set, the defendants are released "on their own recognizance." Release on recognizance is sometimes called RoR, or, particularly in the United States, OR." 5 seconds of research.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.