President Donald J. Trump Proclaims May 1, 2018, as Law Day, U.S.A.

On Law Day, we celebrate our Nation’s heritage of liberty, justice, and equality under the law.  This heritage is embodied most powerfully in our Constitution, the longest surviving document of its kind.  The Constitution established a unique structure of government that has ensured to our country the blessings of liberty through law for nearly 229 years.

The Framers of our Constitution created a government with distinct and independent branches — the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial — because they recognized the risks of concentrating power in one authority.  As James Madison wrote, “the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”  By separating the powers of government into three co-equal branches and giving each branch certain powers to check the others, the Constitution provides a framework in which the rule of law has flourished.

The importance of the rule of law can be seen throughout our Nation’s history.  This year marks the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to our Constitution.  The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits States from denying persons the equal protection of the laws or depriving them of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.  The commitment to the rule of law that led the country to ratify that Amendment was no less powerful than the commitment to the rule of law that led the country to ratify the original Constitution.

That commitment to the rule of law lives on today.  It drives the debates we see around the country about the growth of the administrative state and regulatory authority, and about the unfortunate trend of district court rulings that exceed traditional limits on the judicial power.  We also see that commitment in the people’s demand that their representatives comply with the Constitution, and in the Representatives and Senators themselves who take seriously their oaths to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower first commemorated Law Day in 1958 to celebrate our Nation’s roots in the principles of liberty and guaranteed fundamental rights of individual citizens under the law.  Law Day recognizes that we govern ourselves in accordance with the rule of law rather according to the whims of an elite few or the dictates of collective will.  Through law, we have ensured liberty.  We should not, and do not, take that success for granted.  On this 60th annual observance of Law Day, let us rededicate ourselves to the rule of law as the best means to secure, as the Preamble to our Constitution so wisely states, “the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, in accordance with Public Law 87–20, as amended, do hereby proclaim May 1, 2018, as Law Day, U.S.A.  I urge all Americans, including government officials, to observe this day by reflecting upon the importance of the rule of law in our Nation and displaying the flag of the United States in support of this national observance; and I especially urge the legal profession, the press, and the radio, television, and media industries to promote and to participate in the observance of this day.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand eighteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-second.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

SCOTUS Oral Arguments On Gay Marriage

Day one audio of U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments on the issue of gay marriage.  On of the main arguments of petitioners who are against gay marriage is that it is not "in the best interest of children".

Some of their arguments are hilarious with roaring laughter from the gallery.

I still want to know if anyone is going to address the scientific definition of sex.  Is it phenotypical or genotypical?

HOLLINGSWORTH v. PERRY

The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 26 March 2013. 

Facts of the Case 

In 2000, the citizens of California passed Proposition 22, which affirmed a legal understanding that marriage was a union between one man and one woman. In 2008, the California Supreme Court held that the California Constitution required the term “marriage” to include the union of same-sex couples and invalidated Proposition 22. Later in 2008, California citizens passed Proposition 8, which amended the California Constitution to provide that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized by California.”

The respondents, a gay couple and a lesbian couple, sued the state officials responsible for the enforcement of California’s marriage laws and claimed that Proposition 8 violated their Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection of the law. When the state officials originally named in the suit informed the district court that they could not defend Proposition 8, the petitioners, official proponents of the measure, intervened to defend it. The district court held that Proposition 8 violated the Constitution, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed.

Question:

Do the petitioners have standing under Article III of the Constitution to argue this case?

Does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibit the state of California from defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman?

  Hollingsworth v. Perry - Oral Argument

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Jesus Was An Achor Baby

There has been much fervor surrounding the issue of immigration reform but it seems to be the Republicans who have presented a solution.

They want to amend the 14th Amendment so that there will be no more such thing as "anchor babies". An anchor baby is a child who is born on U.S. soil to parents who are not citizens.

Naturally, the discussion is only focused on those who are recognized as illegal immigrants, but there are many others who are non-recognized stakeholders: the children.

When a parent, illegal immigrant, is deported, what happens to the anchor babies? Well, they are placed in foster care. There is no neglect or abuse but the cases will be classified as such, once again, skewing statistics, making a revenue-maximizing machine seem even needier for funding.

Then, there are actually situations where parents are legal immigrants, yet deported and children placed in foster care for no reason of their own. This is reported as abuse and neglect, falsely fashioning the national statistics.

All these current child welfare policies in dealing with illegal and legal immigrants are reeking havoc upon state and local governments in managing their child welfare operations. It creates unnecessary financial strains upon already stressed budgets, so here is my solution:

If the child abuse propaganda machines can pump out their pathologies to preserve their own imperialistic morality parade, then , by all means, I think we should do the same.

Anchor Babies Will Be Legally Kidnapped

Si usted es un inmigrante ilegal, CPS le lleve a sus hijos.

 إذا كنت مهاجرا غير شرعي ، النيابة العامة سوف تتخذ أطفالك.

Если вы нелегальный иммигрант, CPS будет взять своих детей.

(And Chinese)

If you are an illegal immigrant, CPS will take your children.

First, we start a series of Public Service Announcements in all languages to show the people of the world what will happen if they come to the United States, illegally and economically challenged.

We start an international CPS campaign letting people know that the United States will snatch your anchor babies, throw them in a strange home, dope them up, prepare them for a life of homelessness, incarceration and poverty, and take your future grandchildren, who they will never get to see, and put them through the same cycle, all over again.

I wonder what Mary and Joseph would have done...