Constitutional
Eulogy
Charlie Earl
Can you name
one original constitutional provision or any of the first ten amendments that
the federal government has not violated? Go ahead think about it or “google
it.” Count on your fingers, use your toes and make your best guess. As you
know, we have various classes of crimes listed in our federal, state and local
criminal codes. Basically they fall into two major categories: misdemeanors and
felonies. So…how severe should be the penalty for violating the supreme law of
the land? What purpose is there for writing law and promoting the rule of law
if the “lawmakers” cavalierly ignore the law without suffering penalties? The
disparity between how the elites regard the law versus the expectations for the
common citizens is stark. An inoperable tail light can result in a greater
penalty than overtly violating the Constitution of the United States.
As a
Libertarian candidate for statewide office in 2010, I was frequently told by
voters that my philosophy and my party were too prone to anarchy. The common
understanding of anarchy is that a structure of laws and behaviors does not
exist in society. If my critics truly believed their criticisms of my
philosophy were valid, how can they countenance the anarchic behavior of our
elected, appointed and bureaucratic “masters?” What good is law if it can be
arbitrarily ignored by anyone…especially the lawgivers and enforcers? We are
compelled to accept anarchy by the elites while the populace lives under
tyranny’s thumb. In my view anarchy for all is better than tyranny for most.
Although the
Executive and Legislative branches flaunt their constitutional restrictions on
a daily basis, the courts provided them with the tools for justifying their
disobedience. Just as the statist/progressive agenda has slithered into our
society and political body, so too has it subverted the courts. I am not an
attorney, nor do I play one on television…..and I did not stay in a Holiday Inn
Express last night. There have been numerous landmark cases the Supreme Court
of the United States (SCOTUS) has decided throughout our history. Each of these
in some way left an enduring mark on our nation, our society and our federal
contract. One such decision which has generally escaped notice in the popular
literature was “Chung Fook v. White, 264
U.S. 443 (1924). I urge you to read a summary if you have the time, but the
essence of the SCOTUS decision was that the intent of a law was more important
than its text. In other words…the precedent established by Fook gave justices
the power to determine the social goal or intent of a law versus the actual
language of the legislation. The wizards of our social conscience and contract
wear black robes.
Words have
meanings unless they do not. Laws have purposes unless they’re altered by the
courts or Executive orders. Legislation has goals unless it is written so
vaguely that the bureaucracy has carte
blanche to implement it any way they choose. The bottom line is that
because of legislative imprecision, executive overreaching and judicial mental
gymnastics we are a nation governed by legal anarchists. Our written
foundation, The Constitution of the
United States, and other supporting documents have been sacrificed on the
altar of “feel good” wizardry. The people are compelled to obey a vast array of
rules, laws and regulations while the lawgivers engage in chaotic anarchy. The
rule of law has been suspended “for our own good.”
There is a
glimmer of hope. Anarchy is not a default position for most of us. We seek
order and stability, but we do desire individual liberty and personal
decision-making. At some point (coming sooner rather than later, I suspect)
citizens will resist the capriciousness of our national leadership and their
pompous proclamations. Some will go on with their lives by ignoring the braying
of Big Brother. Others will fight back within the system by trying to change
laws and policy. A third subset may actively seek to undermine the insane and
grossly unrealistic command structure of the nation. Whatever happens, it will
be disruptive or we will succumb to whimsical tyranny. We are governed by a
bevy of three-year-olds who arbitrarily choose which laws they will obey. Maybe
it’s time to introduce them to the Law of Gravity and watch them fall.
Charlie Earl
No comments:
Post a Comment