youtube/watch?v=KpNqNPkhkvI But just to be clear Nathan Dahm, the constitution can NOT be changed or amended to take away from anything already in the constitution. So you are absolutely wrong that the proper way to change it is to amend it. Let me present to you the supporting facts to back this. Statutes, Acts, Ordinances and Codes ARE NOT LAWS Statutes,acts,ordinances and codes ARE NOT laws, they are legislative “RULES” of a society. Legislative rules of a society are given force through law. Law proceed rules. Maxim of law: Government can only control what it creates. (The power which is derived cannot be greater than that from which it is derived.) Not Legal Advice U.S. Constitution, Article Six, Clause 2: (The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution) “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137 (1803): “No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.” (If any statement, within any law, which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional.) Norton v. Shelby County 118 USR 425 (1886): “An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it has never been passed.” “The court follows the decision of the highest court of the state, in construing the constitution and the laws of the state unless they conflict with or impair the efficacy of some principle of the Federal Constitution or of the Federal Statutes or rule of the commercial or general law. The decision of the state court’s in questions relating to the existence of its subordinate tribunals and eligibility in elections or appointment of their officers and the passage of its laws are conclusive upon Federal Courts. While acts of de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law. An existing or often held to be binding from reasons of public policy. The acts of the person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office, which does not exist, can have no validity whatever in law.”
Posted on: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 16:25:34 +0000