TAC Daily Digest http://feed.informer.com/digests/WYPPR38WMR/feeder TAC Daily Digest Respective post owners and feed distributors Fri, 13 Sep 2019 22:13:53 +0000 Feed Informer http://feed.informer.com/ Police Use Contact Tracing and Geofencing to ID Protesters https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/police-use-contact-tracing-and-geofencing-to-id-protesters/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:b3d7cee1-4c26-5b71-c52b-09431e2340e9 Tue, 02 Jun 2020 15:31:37 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/police-use-contact-tracing-and-geofencing-to-id-protesters/" title="Police Use Contact Tracing and Geofencing to ID Protesters" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-279x157.png 279w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-768x432.png 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1024x576.png 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Countless warnings about how law enforcement could use contact-tracing apps to monitor people have gone unheeded. As BGR.com revealed police are using contact tracing to identify protester&#8217;s affiliations. &#8220;According to Minnesota Public Safety Commissioner John Harringon, officials there have been using what they describe, without going into much detail, as contact-tracing in order to build out a picture of [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/police-use-contact-tracing-and-geofencing-to-id-protesters/" title="Police Use Contact Tracing and Geofencing to ID Protesters" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-279x157.png 279w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-768x432.png 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1024x576.png 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Countless warnings about how law enforcement could use contact-tracing apps to monitor people have gone unheeded.</p> <p>As <i>BGR.com</i> <a href="https://bgr.com/2020/05/30/minnesota-protest-contact-tracing-used-to-track-demonstrators/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">revealed</a> police are using contact tracing to identify protester&#8217;s affiliations.<span id="more-34762"></span></p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;According to Minnesota Public Safety Commissioner John Harringon, officials there have been using what they describe, without going into much detail, as contact-tracing in order to build out a picture of protestor affiliations — a process that officials in the state say has led them to conclude that much of the protest activity there is being fueled by people from outside coming in.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>A Twitter feed titled <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=minnesota%20contact%20tracing&amp;src=typeahead_click" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">&#8220;Minnesota Contact Tracing&#8221;</a> revealed how police are using contact tracing to identify and arrest protesters. &#8220;Minnesota Public Safety Commissioner John Harrington says they&#8217;ve begun contact tracing arrestees.&#8221;</p> <p>Recently, 100 human rights groups <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/POL3020812020ENGLISH.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">warned</a> that an Apple-Google contact tracing app could be used as a cover to identify activists and minorities.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;An increase in state digital surveillance powers, such as obtaining access to mobile phone location data, threatens privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of association, in ways that could violate rights and degrade trust in public authorities—undermining the effectiveness of any public health response. Such measures also pose a risk of discrimination and may disproportionately harm already marginalized communities.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>So despite all assurances to the contrary, it appears that 100 human rights groups were right; law enforcement can and will use contact tracing to identify protesters.</p> <p>As <i>NBC News</i> <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/education/unc-campus-police-used-geofencing-tech-monitor-antiracism-protestors-n1105746" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">noted</a>, contact tracers also use <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/05/27/geofence-warrants-a-high-tech-repeat-from-the-revolution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">geofencing</a> to help identify protesters.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;Geofencing captures the social media posts of people entering a specific area. The technology locates any cellphones that cross into the area by locking onto their geolocation systems, and then records social media posts and sometimes other data from the phones.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p><i>Time</i> <a href="https://time.com/5845367/pentagon-military-police-minneapolis-protests-george-floyd/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">exposed</a> how the military (National Guard) uses a classified system called &#8220;Secret Internet Protocol Router&#8221; or SIPR to monitor protesters. (To learn about Perspecta Inc.&#8217;s role click <a href="https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-secret-government-computer-network-that-made-wikileaks-cable-release-possible/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">here</a> &amp; <a href="https://perspecta.com/press-releases/perspecta-awarded-%24162m-program-to-modernize-classified-network-for-air-force" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">here</a>.)</p> <p>Big Tech&#8217;s hands are dirty with Federal money paying for new ways to monitor Americans.</p> <p>A recent <i>Business Insider</i> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-police-use-tech-facial-recognition-ai-drones-2019-10" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">article</a> describes how police use Big Tech to monitor activists and protesters the moment they walk out their door.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;Law enforcement agencies have made full use of high-tech surveillance tools as protests sweep the country following the death of George Floyd. A predator drone operated by Customs and Border Patrol circled above protesters in Minneapolis.&#8221;<br /> </i></p></blockquote> <p><i>Buzzfeed News</i> <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/carolinehaskins1/george-floyd-protests-surveillance-technology" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">warns</a>, &#8220;law enforcement has a wide breadth of surveillance technologies that could be used to monitor and target protesters — including controversial facial recognition software Clearview AI, license plate readers, body cameras, and video analysis tools.&#8221;</p> <p>Both of these articles reveal a frightening array of Big Tech surveillance devices being used by police nationwide.</p> <p>Minneapolis police and the Minnesota Fusion Center are also using Clearview AI, BriefCam, Ring doorbell cameras, Axon police body cameras, ShotSpotter and license plate readers to create an intimate view into people&#8217;s lives.</p> <p><i>BuzzFeed&#8217;s</i> article also revealed how police use Arxys &#8220;Milestone&#8221; software which uses video detection and analytics to identify people.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;The Minneapolis Police Department said in a <a href="http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/groups/public/@civilrights/documents/webcontent/wcmsp-218180.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">surveillance white paper</a> that it uses <a href="https://www.milestonesys.com/solutions/platform/video-management-software/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Arxys [Milestone] software</a> — a video management tool that claims to offer &#8220;video motion detection&#8221; and &#8220;video analytics&#8221; — to analyze CCTV footage.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>While both articles do a great job of revealing some of the ways law enforcement can monitor anyone, it really did not go into detail about how invasive Big Tech&#8217;s surveillance devices truly are.</p> <p>Let&#8217;s say you use your smartphone for everything; texts, phone calls, pictures, music, etc., if you also use Alexa or a NEST thermostat or any smart device in your home, these devices collect, store and transmit all that personal data, which police can use to identify a person. Police can also identify people who use a Tablet or laptop, because like a phone they have an IP and MAC address.</p> <p>If you use any of these devices to make online purchases, police can ask those companies to provide details of what you bought and when. Anytime you use a credit/debit or customer rewards card, someone is compiling a database of everything you purchased.</p> <p>Let&#8217;s say you drive or take public transit, police can track your vehicle and they can use facial recognition to identify where you work or which bus or train stops you use.</p> <p>If you drive or take an Uber or Lyft, chances are your personal information is being recorded and used to build a massive database of your comings and goings. From the moment you step outside of your home, your neighbor&#8217;s Ring doorbell or Flock cameras have identified you, your family and your vehicle.</p> <p>And if they are any social distance snitches in your neighborhood, they have recorded you and reported you to police via Ring Neighbors or NextDoor.</p> <p>Thanks to Big Tech, a person&#8217;s everyday life is no longer private. Now everything we do is being recorded in real-time. Things like what and where you eat, who your friends and family members are, who your family doctor is or where you worship are all available to law enforcement.</p> <p>Despite what Big tech, politicians and law enforcement say, AI and smart devices are being used to identify activists and protesters.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Current Events Surveillance Contact Tracing facial recognition geofencing surveillance jprivate To the Governor: Three Louisiana Bills to Expand Medical Marijuana, Despite Federal Prohibition https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/to-the-governor-three-louisiana-bills-to-expand-medical-marijuana-despite-federal-prohibition/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:2aae1906-57f1-40cb-e0d9-b2b15481986d Tue, 02 Jun 2020 15:26:38 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/to-the-governor-three-louisiana-bills-to-expand-medical-marijuana-despite-federal-prohibition/" title="To the Governor: Three Louisiana Bills to Expand Medical Marijuana, Despite Federal Prohibition" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="627" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-768x401.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-1024x535.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-1080x564.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />BATON ROUGE, La. (June 2, 2020) &#8211; On Friday, the Louisiana legislature gave final approval to three bills that would expand the state&#8217;s medical-marijuana program despite federal prohibition. Rep. Larry Bagley (R-Stonewall) introduced House Bill 819 (HB819) in March. As introduced, the legislation added traumatic brain injuries and concussions to the list of conditions that [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/to-the-governor-three-louisiana-bills-to-expand-medical-marijuana-despite-federal-prohibition/" title="To the Governor: Three Louisiana Bills to Expand Medical Marijuana, Despite Federal Prohibition" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="627" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-768x401.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-1024x535.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-1080x564.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/05/louisiana-welcome-sign-flickr-1200-1-e1557416135768-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><strong>BATON ROUGE</strong>, La. (June 2, 2020) &#8211; On Friday, the Louisiana legislature gave final approval to three bills that would expand the state&#8217;s medical-marijuana program despite federal prohibition.<span id="more-34760"></span></p> <p>Rep. Larry Bagley (R-Stonewall) introduced House Bill 819 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/bill/HB819/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB819</a>) in March. As introduced, the legislation added traumatic brain injuries and concussions to the list of conditions that qualify a patient for medical marijuana. A House committee expanded the bill to allow doctors to recommend medicinal cannabis to patients for any debilitating condition that they deem fit. A Senate amendment requires dispensaries to record medical marijuana purchases in the state prescription monitoring program database.</p> <p>On May 15, the House passed HB819 by <a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/rollcall/HB819/id/959022" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a 77-15 vote</a>. The Senate approved the measure on May 27 by a <a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/rollcall/HB819/id/960746" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">28-6 vote</a>. On Friday, the House <a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/rollcall/HB819/id/961732" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">concurred with the Senate amendment</a>, sending the bill to Gov. John Bel Edwards&#8217; desk for his consideration.</p> <p>Rep. Jeremy LaCombe (D-Livonia) introduced House Bill 418 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/bill/HB418/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB418</a>) back in February. Under the proposed law, any physician who recommends medical marijuana to a patient and any facility that is licensed by the Louisiana Department of Health that has patients in its care using medical marijuana under state law are exempt from prosecution under the state&#8217;s marijuana laws.</p> <p>On May 22, the House passed HB418 by <a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/rollcall/HB418/id/960052" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a 75-18 vote</a>. The Senate approved the measure on Friday <a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/rollcall/HB418/id/961633" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">34-2</a>. The House concurred with a technical amendment and the bill now goes to Gov. Edwards&#8217; desk for his consideration.</p> <p>Rep. Edmond Jordan (D-Baton Rouge) introduced House Bill 211 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/bill/HB211/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB211</a>) in February. The legislation protects banks and credit unions that service cannabis businesses from being penalized by state regulators. The proposed law prohibits regulators from taking any action to discourage financial institutions in the state from servicing legitimate medical marijuana businesses, or from levying any penalties against banks or credit unions serving medical marijuana businesses.</p> <p>The House passed HB211 <a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/rollcall/HB211/id/959723" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">by a 73-20 vote</a> and the Senate <a href="https://legiscan.com/LA/rollcall/HB211/id/961537" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">approved the measure 29-0</a>. It also goes to Gov. Edwards&#8217; desk for his consideration.</p> <p>West Virginia <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/04/signed-as-law-west-virginia-bill-to-facilitate-banking-for-medical-marijuana-program/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">enacted a similar law last year</a>. This legislation intended to allay fears that <a href="https://publicpolicy.wharton.upenn.edu/issue-brief/v6n2.php">banks will be prosecuted</a> or penalized for taking in marijuana-related accounts. The Federal government has <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/08/the-federal-reserves-war-on-drugs/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">used banking laws as a weapon</a> in its unconstitutional war on cannabis by making it impossible for marijuana businesses to access the banking system – even in states where marijuana has been legalized. The feds can prosecute bankers for knowingly engaging with cannabis businesses under the Bank Secrecy Act, the USA Patriot Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.</p> <p>While the enactment of HB211 cannot stop federal prosecution of a Louisiana financial institution engaging in the medical marijuana business, it would provide some assurance that the state will shield it from financial loss and could create an environment where banks in the state are willing to handle medical marijuana funds.</p> <p><b>EFFECT ON FEDERAL PROHIBITION</b></p> <p>Under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) passed in 1970, the federal government maintains complete prohibition of marijuana. Of course, the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to ban or regulate cannabis within the borders of a state, despite the opinion of the politically connected lawyers on the Supreme Court. If you doubt this, ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to institute federal alcohol prohibition.</p> <p>Despite federal prohibition, Louisiana legalized medical marijuana in 2015, but there wasn’t any viable program in the state until <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/08/now-in-effect-louisiana-medical-marijuana-law-shields-patients-and-caregivers-from-prosecution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the passage of two laws the following year</a>.  The state <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/08/now-in-effect-louisiana-laws-expand-medical-marijuana-program-despite-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">expanded the program in 2018</a>. Further expansion would remove yet another layer of laws punishing the possession and use of marijuana in the state, but federal prohibition would remain in effect. This is significant because FBI statistics show that law enforcement makes approximately 99 of 100 marijuana arrests under state, not federal law. When states stop enforcing marijuana laws, they sweep away most of the basis for 99 percent of marijuana arrests.</p> <p>Furthermore, figures indicate it would take 40 percent of the DEA’s yearly-budget just to investigate and raid all of the dispensaries in Los Angeles – a single city in a single state. That doesn’t include the cost of prosecution. The lesson? The feds lack the resources to enforce marijuana prohibition without state assistance.</p> <p><b>A GROWING MOVEMENT</b></p> <p>Louisiana joins a growing number of states increasingly ignoring federal prohibition, and nullifying it in practice.</p> <p>Colorado, Washington state, Oregon and Alaska were the first states to legalize recreational cannabis, and California, Nevada, Maine and Massachusetts joined them after ballot initiatives in favor of legalization passed in November 2016. Michigan followed suit when <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/11/michigan-votes-to-legalize-marijuana-nullify-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">voters legalized cannabis for general use</a> in 2018. Vermont <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/01/signed-as-law-vermont-legalizes-recreational-marijuana-foundation-to-nullify-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">became the first state</a> to legalize marijuana through a legislative act in 2018. <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/06/signed-by-the-governor-illinois-legalizes-marijuana-despite-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Illinois followed suit in 2019</a>.</p> <p>With 33 states including allowing cannabis for medical use, the feds find themselves in a position where they <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/01/nullification-works-and-they-know-it-good-morning-liberty-01-30-19/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">simply can’t enforce prohibition anymore</a>.</p> <p>The lesson here is pretty straightforward. When enough people say, ‘No!’ to the federal government, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, there’s not much the feds can do to shove their so-called laws, regulations or mandates down our throats.</p> <p>Efforts to expand medical marijuana laws in Louisiana underscore another important strategic reality. Once a state legalizes marijuana – even if only in a very limited way – it tends to eventually expand. As the state tears down some barriers, markets develop and demand expands. That creates pressure to further relax state law. These new laws represent a further erosion of unconstitutional federal marijuana prohibition.</p> <p><strong>WHAT&#8217;S NEXT<br /> </strong></p> <p>Gov. Edwards will have 20 days from the date the three bills are transmitted to his office to sign or veto. If he does not act, the bills will become law without his signature.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Drug War State Bills cannabis HB211 HB418 HB819 Louisiana Marijuana Mike Maharrey How the Founders Responded to an Epidemic in the Nation’s Capital https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/01/how-the-founders-responded-to-an-epidemic-in-the-nations-capital/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:2b86964c-c070-faf2-d111-0d986725e5fc Mon, 01 Jun 2020 15:02:43 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/01/how-the-founders-responded-to-an-epidemic-in-the-nations-capital/" title="How the Founders Responded to an Epidemic in the Nation&#8217;s Capital" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />What did the Washington administration do in response? Nothing. <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/01/how-the-founders-responded-to-an-epidemic-in-the-nations-capital/" title="How the Founders Responded to an Epidemic in the Nation&#8217;s Capital" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_242818111-philadelphia-1848-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><em>by Lawrence Reed, <a href="https://fee.org/articles/how-the-founders-responded-to-an-epidemic-in-the-nations-capital/">FEE</a></em></p> <blockquote><p>Do not read this book before eating, or in the midst of a sleepless night. For it is a revolting book, filled with the disgusting details of a loathsome disease.</p></blockquote> <p>Sounds like the opening paragraph of a one-star review by a merciless critic, but it’s not. It’s from the 1949 preface to a book by the book’s author himself, J. H. Powell. Titled <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1614279853/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&amp;psc=1" data-anchor="?ie=UTF8&amp;psc=1"><em>Bring Out Your Dead: The Great Plague of Yellow Fever in Philadelphia in 1793</em></a>, it is “the story of a foul and fantastic pestilence, striking without warning in all classes of society,” a true account of “people sick in body and heart, astonished and fearful, paralyzed by the mysterious obscenity about them.”</p> <p>I thoroughly enjoyed it—the <em>book</em>, that is.</p> <p>Powell brings to life the people and events of the worst epidemic in American history—yes, worse than the Wuhan coronavirus of 2019-2020 and the Spanish Flu of 1918. Though it was localized in Philadelphia, it killed nearly ten percent of the city of 51,000 people between August 1 and November 9, 1793. That’s about ten times the death rate in the U.S. from today’s pandemic. More than 40 percent of Philadelphians fled into the countryside to escape a disease whose origin (a virus spread by the bite of a mosquito) no one would know for another hundred years.</p> <p>New interest in historic health disasters is drawing attention to Powell’s book, as well as another good one from 2003, <em><a href="https://www.amazon.com/American-Plague-Terrifying-Epidemic-Newbery-ebook/dp/B00NS3UNQC/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3KVY0MVTUIX5G&amp;dchild=1&amp;keywords=an+american+plague+by+jim+murphy&amp;qid=1590072601&amp;s=books&amp;sprefix=an+american+pla%2Cstripbooks%2C154&amp;sr=1-1" data-anchor="?crid=3KVY0MVTUIX5G&amp;dchild=1&amp;keywords=an+american+plague+by+jim+murphy&amp;qid=1590072601&amp;s=books&amp;sprefix=an+american+pla%2Cstripbooks%2C154&amp;sr=1-1">An American Plague: The True and Terrifying Story of the Yellow Fever Epidemic of 1793</a> </em>by Jim Murphy. For this essay, I draw passages from both volumes.</p> <p>Philadelphia was America’s national capital and headquarters of the federal government in 1793. By act of Congress, the capital wouldn’t move to what is now Washington, D.C. for another seven years. President George Washington had commenced his second term in March. Five months later, in the midst of a hot, wet summer, Philadelphians suddenly took sick in huge numbers, leading quickly to scores of deaths each day. What did the Washington administration do in response?</p> <p><em>Nothing</em>. That’s all it could do. It possessed no constitutional duty in the matter and even less experience and expertise. No one argued there were epidemiological exceptions to the First Amendment or, for that matter, to any other provisions in the document ratified just four years earlier. So the federal government never got involved.</p> <p>Even if the federal government possessed the power to jump into the crisis, it’s hard to conceive of any action it might have taken that would have better met the challenge than what Philadelphians did, crude though it seems by today’s standards. The feds were there, on the scene, but possessed no special knowledge the locals did not also have. Yellow fever is not contagious from one person to another. The disease requires a mosquito in between and nobody knew that then. Lockdowns would likely have made little difference.</p> <p>The one big issue the Washington administration had to decide—whether to convene Congress in the fall at its Philadelphia location or somewhere else—prompted sharp views on both sides. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison (both of an Anti-Federalist bent) told the President he had no authority to move the site where Congress met, so it would have to be Philadelphia, in spite of the crisis. Alexander Hamilton argued that if a foreign enemy occupied the capital or if any other kind of disaster in the city prevented Congress from assembling, then of course the President could bring it together elsewhere. Just weeks into the epidemic, Washington and his Cabinet members themselves skedaddled to Germantown, ten miles to the north, and they hoped Congress would follow.</p> <p>Jefferson and Madison won that one but, in the end, the question was moot. The first frost in early November killed the mosquitoes and the disease with it. Congress met in Philadelphia in December but one of its first acts was to pass a law authorizing the President to convene it outside the national capital in the future, should conditions require it.</p> <p>Pennsylvania state government was also domiciled in Philadelphia at the time. The capital wouldn’t be moved to Harrisburg until 1812. In 1793, Governor Thomas Mifflin and the legislature provided some money to Philadelphia to help handle the crisis, then they left town for the duration. So it all came down to Philadelphians. Fortunately, they were blessed with both public and private leadership talent in the persons of Mayor Matthew Clarkson, Dr. Benjamin Rush, and others. Rush was a signer of the Declaration of Independence and had served as Surgeon General of the Continental Army during the War for Independence.</p> <p>To this day, no cure exists for yellow fever. Thanks largely to the work of U.S. Army physician Dr. Walter Reed (no relation) in 1901, we know that the virus is spread by a particular species of mosquito, <em><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aedes_aegypti" rel="nofollow">Aedes aegypti</a></em><em>. </em>Modern treatments and palliatives greatly reduce suffering and deaths. Draining swamps and pools of stagnant water remain the most effective preventative measures. But 230 years ago, what a victim endured and what “experts” prescribed were a medieval horror show. Powell writes,</p> <blockquote><p>Lassitude, glazed eyes, chills, fevers, headaches, nausea, retching, and nosebleeds would suddenly attack people in the best of health. These symptoms, more violent than any the doctors had ever observed, would be followed by a yellow tinge in the eyeballs, puking, fearful straining of the stomach, the black vomit, hiccoughs, depression, “deep and distressed sighing, comatose delirium,” stupor, purplish discoloration of the whole body [from liver damage], finally death.</p></blockquote> <p>In the panic that followed the onset of the epidemic, there was no end to the weird and ineffective treatments suggested and tried. They included dousing the afflicted with vinegar, “earth-bathing” (rolling in dirt), drinking molasses by the quart, burning tobacco in the streets. Purging and blood-letting were Dr. Rush’s favored remedies, which also included a concoction of mercury and jalap, the latter being a drug extracted from the tuberous roots of a Mexican climbing plant. As Murphy’s book reveals,</p> <blockquote><p>Ads appeared in the newspapers hawking Peruvian bark, salt of vinegar, refined camphor, and other concoctions, such as Daffey’s Elixir (which contained so much pure alcohol that a glass of it could put a person into a drunken stupor). The science of medicine at the end of the eighteenth century still relied a great deal on ancient myths and folk remedies.</p></blockquote> <p>Someone recommended that to purify the air of whatever was causing the disease, gunpowder should be liberally set afire. So for a brief time until residents complained of the noise and smoke, municipal workers pulled cannons through the streets and fired them every few yards or so.</p> <p>Unaware that a mosquito was the carrier, many people thought they could catch yellow fever from proximity to someone infected. So “social distancing” became the norm. Powell writes,</p> <blockquote><p>People quickly acquired the habits of living with fear. Handshaking was abandoned, acquaintances snubbed, everyone walked in the middle of the streets to avoid contaminated homes. Those wearing mourning bands were obviously dangerous, as were doctors and ministers. People maneuvered in passing to get windward of anyone they met.</p></blockquote> <p>City government ordered a limited quarantine of arriving foreigners but to little effect because the source of the problem was not overseas. It was quickly lifted. When the city cleaned up the filth in and around the wharves on the river, it likely did more to help than the quarantine.</p> <p>Afraid to leave their homes unless they had a place to flee to in the countryside, Philadelphians withdrew from commerce. Businesses closed. Mail delivery stopped. Newspapers were reduced to a single page for lack of advertising. Incoming vessels on the Delaware River couldn’t find dock workers so they sat in the water or on the docks while their cargo rotted.</p> <p>Even clocks in the city went haywire. So many clockmakers and time-setters were sick, dead or gone that Philadelphians often couldn’t tell for sure what time it was.</p> <p>Churches in Philadelphia never closed during the epidemic. Given the nature of the disease, it wouldn’t have made a difference either way. If government officials <em>had</em> ordered them closed, there’s good reason to believe that devout Philadelphians would have defied or resisted such orders.</p> <p>To his credit, Mayor Clarkson responded with courage and good sense. He formed a committee of respected local citizens who organized makeshift hospitals, raised money for treatment, cleaned the streets and wharves, and looked after children suddenly orphaned when parents or guardians died from the disease.</p> <p>Some white residents complained that black nurses in town were raising their fees in the midst of the crisis. They took their complaint to the mayor, hoping he would impose controls on those fees. He said no. Jim Murphy tells us,</p> <blockquote><p>The mayor knew he couldn’t order black nurses to refuse any fee over a dollar. If he forced them to hold down their costs, he would have to do the same with every merchant, laborer, and farmer doing business in town. How much food would be brought to market if he insisted that only pre-plague prices be charged? How many carters would haul away diseased corpses? What was happening with the black nurses was a classic example of demand exceeding supply, resulting in higher prices, and nothing more…He also had an ad published in the newspapers that admonished citizens to cease bothering the black nurses as they went about town to do their work.</p></blockquote> <p>Dr. Rush, though wrong about remedies, was right about his initial warnings that the illness was yellow fever; he also labored long hours to bring comfort to the afflicted. He died in 1813, widely esteemed a hero by his fellow citizens.</p> <p>People in nearby cities and adjacent states pitched in to help the City of Brotherly Love while the illness raged. New Yorkers were first with a gift to Philadelphia of $5,000—a substantial sum in those days and the start of a cascade of philanthropy for Philly. According to Powell,</p> <blockquote><p>The news of $5,000 from New York spread about the city like a tonic. It was, Editor Brown proclaimed, an act of noble sympathy and generosity. And as other donations poured in, the Committee (of Mayor Clarkson’s creation) wisely gave publicity to them all, even the smallest. Brown’s columns soon were filled with letters from villages, townships, counties, congregations, and synods, all conveying gifts of some kind to the Mayor’s care. The distraught citizens could take heart. They were not alone in misfortune. All America was sharing their burden.</p></blockquote> <p>None of that giving was required by anybody. It was simply what Americans did, from the depths of their giving hearts, without mandates from on high. The Philadelphia epidemic of 1793 was one of the new country’s earliest and best examples of the cascade of private charity that defined the nation for the next two centuries.</p> <p>Yellow fever outbreaks in Philadelphia occurred again during the last three years of the 1790s. None, fortunately, were as lethal and widespread as the 1793 episode.</p> <p>All these many decades later, perhaps the applicable lessons for today of Philadelphia’s experience then are few and limited. For sure, it’s a tribute to the city that it rallied and prospered, thanks to the initiative of its citizens and the freedoms the nation as a whole enjoyed in its early decades. Half a century after the epidemic, Philadelphia was a bustling city of 122,000 people—two and a half times its size on the eve of the 1793 disaster.</p> <p>Lawrence W. Reed is President Emeritus and Humphreys Family Senior Fellow at FEE, having served for nearly 11 years as FEE’s president (2008-2019). He is author of the 2020 book, <strong><a href="https://store.fee.org/products/was-jesus-a-socialist"><em>Was Jesus a Socialist?</em></a> </strong>as well as <a href="https://amzn.to/2ThSz9P"><em>Real Heroes: Incredible True Stories of Courage, Character, and Conviction</em></a> and <a href="https://amzn.to/3e8AGm7"><em>Excuse Me, Professor: Challenging the Myths of Progressivism</em></a>. Follow on <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/lawrence-reed-20a2846/">LinkedIn</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/lawrencewr">Twitter</a> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Lawrence-Reed-202924809735438" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Like</a> his public figure page on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Lawrence-Reed-202924809735438/">Facebook</a>. His website is <a href="https://slack-redir.net/link?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawrencewreed.com" target="https://slack-redir.net/link?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawrencewreed.com" rel="noopener noreferrer">www.lawrencewreed.com</a>.</p> <p style="font-style: italic;">This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the <a href="https://fee.org/articles/how-the-founders-responded-to-an-epidemic-in-the-nations-capital/">original article</a>.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Founding Fathers History Charity Coronavirus founders Tenth Amendment Federal Courts: A Failed Strategy for Liberty https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/federal-courts-a-failed-strategy-for-liberty/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:5eb0f1f0-ee1a-ef4f-2c5b-5ed87e775138 Mon, 01 Jun 2020 12:54:17 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/federal-courts-a-failed-strategy-for-liberty/" title="Federal Courts: A Failed Strategy for Liberty" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Counting on federal courts to impose liberty is a failed strategy. I recently appeared on the Scott Horton show to explain why. The Supreme Court recently chipped a little more off the Fourth Amendment, holding that police can pull over a car just because the registered owner has a suspended license. In a sane world [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/06/federal-courts-a-failed-strategy-for-liberty/" title="Federal Courts: A Failed Strategy for Liberty" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/05/video-thumbnail-supreme-court-part-of-the-problem-c-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Counting on federal courts to impose liberty is a failed strategy. I recently appeared on the Scott Horton show to explain why.<span id="more-34725"></span></p> <p>The Supreme Court recently <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/11/another-case-shows-the-supreme-court-doesnt-protect-liberty/">chipped a little more off the Fourth Amendment</a>, holding that police can pull over a car just because the registered owner has a suspended license. In a sane world that upheld the Fourth Amendment, that wouldn&#8217;t constitute probable cause. After all, the owner isn&#8217;t necessarily the driver.</p> <p>But in a world where federal judges define our rights, government power trumps our rights virtually every time. Of course, state courts are bad too, but their opinions only impact that state. SCOTUS decisions apply to all 320-plus million people in 50 states. That&#8217;s why centralizing government authority for liberty is a fool&#8217;s game. I explain why in-depth in this interview. Scott and I also talk about why there is no such thing as &#8220;constitutional rights.&#8221;</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> 4th Amendment Audio/Video Court Cases Interviews Judiciary Strategy Supreme court Mike Maharrey Tenth Amendment Center Blog 34:14 Counting on federal courts to impose liberty is a failed strategy. I recently appeared on the Scott Horton show to explain why. The Supreme Court recently chipped a little more off the Fourth Amendment, holding that police can pull over a car just beca... Counting on federal courts to impose liberty is a failed strategy. I recently appeared on the Scott Horton show to explain why. The Supreme Court recently chipped a little more off the Fourth Amendment, holding that police can pull over a car just because the registered owner has a suspended license. In a sane world […] We’ve Turned “Protect and Serve” Into “Command and Control” https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/weve-turned-protect-and-serve-into-command-and-control/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:97d0135f-4ede-364b-ec5c-ebe679560bee Sun, 31 May 2020 15:52:35 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/weve-turned-protect-and-serve-into-command-and-control/" title="We&#8217;ve Turned &#8220;Protect and Serve&#8221; Into &#8220;Command and Control&#8221;" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="629" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-768x403.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-1024x537.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-1080x566.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />American police have an institutional problem with violence. It flows out of the war on drugs which has led to the increasing militarization of police officers. If you keep telling cops they&#8217;re in a war, it comes as no surprise when they start to act like it. If you dress police like an occupying army, [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/weve-turned-protect-and-serve-into-command-and-control/" title="We&#8217;ve Turned &#8220;Protect and Serve&#8221; Into &#8220;Command and Control&#8221;" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="629" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-768x403.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-1024x537.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-1080x566.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/08/police-militarization-1200-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>American police have an institutional problem with violence. </p> <p>It flows out of the war on drugs which has led to the increasing militarization of police officers. If you keep telling cops they&#8217;re in a war, it comes as no surprise when they start to act like it.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">If you dress police like an occupying army, they&#39;re going to act like one. We&#39;ve turned &quot;protect and serve&quot; into &quot;command and control&quot; <a href="https://twitter.com/mmaharrey10th?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mmaharrey10th</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/policestate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#policestate</a> <a href="https://t.co/OD52B8Or3d">pic.twitter.com/OD52B8Or3d</a></p> <p>&mdash; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) <a href="https://twitter.com/TenthAmendment/status/1265711318796890112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 27, 2020</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <p><strong>For Further Reading</strong></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/06/police-militarization-weapons-of-war-darpa-surveillance/">Weapons of War on our Streets: A Guide to the Militarization of Police</a></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/08/28/executive-order-takes-window-dressing-off-police-militarization-program/">Executive Order Takes Window Dressing off Police Militarization Program</a></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/03/10/department-of-defense-writes-to-the-tenth-amendment-center-on-police-militarization/">Department of Defense Writes to the Tenth Amendment Center on Police Militarization</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Police Tenther Essentials Militarization Mike Maharrey The Incorporation Doctrine Broke the Constitutional System https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/30/the-incorporation-doctrine-broke-the-constitutional-system/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:2e81b2e2-bd48-dc45-726b-e61abdca6093 Sat, 30 May 2020 16:08:31 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/30/the-incorporation-doctrine-broke-the-constitutional-system/" title="The Incorporation Doctrine Broke the Constitutional System" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />I think centralizing power is always a net loss for liberty. So did the founding generation. This is why the framers of the Constitution emphatically rejected a proposal to give the federal government veto-power over state laws. It&#8217;s also why the first Congress rejected applying some provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states. [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/30/the-incorporation-doctrine-broke-the-constitutional-system/" title="The Incorporation Doctrine Broke the Constitutional System" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/smash-242295979-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>I think centralizing power is always a net loss for liberty. So did the founding generation. This is why the framers of the Constitution emphatically rejected a proposal to give the federal government veto-power over state laws. It&#8217;s also why the first Congress rejected applying some provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states.<span id="more-29283"></span></p> <p>When I say this, it tends to confuse people because, in today&#8217;s political system, the federal government vetoes state laws all the time through federal courts. And virtually every time somebody perceives that a state government has violated their rights, they run straight to federal courts to stop the offending state action.</p> <p>Despite my protests, the application of the federal Bill of Rights to the states has become a key feature of the American political system.</p> <p>As I said, I believe this will ultimately prove to be a net loss for liberty. When you turn to federal courts to protect your liberty from state actions, you&#8217;re playing a game of Russian roulette with five bullets loaded into your six-shooter. Despite a few minor victories here and there, <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/11/another-case-shows-the-supreme-court-doesnt-protect-liberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">federal courts almost always come out with opinions that expand government power</a>, not protect individual liberty. And these expansions of government power become the law of the land across the entire United States. In a decentralized system, bad state court decisions only impact the people in that one state.</p> <p>The risk isn&#8217;t worth the reward.</p> <p>And yet here we are.</p> <p>Among friends of liberty, you will find a great deal of support for using federal courts to stop states from violating individual rights. Despite my misgivings, I can understand the impulse. When we see state governments trampling rights, we want somebody to step in. The feds are more than happy to step. Why not take advantage of their service. But if you&#8217;re going to support the enforcement of the federal Bill of Rights on state and local governments, you need to understand where this purported power comes from and its implications on the American constitutional system.</p> <p><strong>The BIll of Rights Was Never Intended to Apply to State or Local Governments</strong></p> <p>The application of the Bill of Rights to state and local governments was not a feature of the original constitution. It came about through a series of federal court cases based on the 14th Amendment.</p> <p>A lot of people believe that the Bill of Rights always applied to state governments. This is simply not true. <a href="https://www.michaelmaharrey.com/919-919/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Bill of Rights was never intended to bind the actions of state governments.</a></p> <p>The preamble to the Bill of Rights makes its purpose absolutely clear: to further restrict <strong>federal government</strong> power.</p> <blockquote><p><i>THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of <strong>its powers</strong>, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in <strong>the Government</strong>, will best ensure the beneficent ends of <strong>its</strong> institution. </i>[Emphasis added]</p></blockquote> <p>The words “its powers” clearly refer back to the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was intended to “prevent misconstruction or abuse” of the Constitution’s powers as exercised through “the government” – <strong>the federal government</strong>. Notice the word &#8220;government&#8221; is not plural.</p> <p>The preamble of the Bill of Rights makes no mention of limiting the power of state governments. The state ratifying conventions had no intention of restricting their state’s own powers. They already had state constitutions to do that job.</p> <p>This is an undebatable fact  &#8212; no founding-era evidence exists that Congress or the state ratifiers intended for the protections included in the Bill of Rights to bind state governments. None.</p> <p>Doing so would have essentially created a federal veto over state laws. As I&#8217;ve already said, this idea was rejected during the framing of the Constitution. It would have allowed for a massive expansion of central government authority – the exact opposite of the stated purpose of including a bill of rights.</p> <p><strong>The Incorporation Doctrine</strong></p> <p>The federal courts enforce the Bill of Rights on the states today through a legal framework known as the <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/23/the-incorporation-doctrine-and-the-bill-of-rights/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">incorporation doctrine</a>.</p> <p>In a nutshell, the Supreme Court invented the incorporation doctrine through the 14th Amendment. It relies on a dubious legal principle called &#8220;substantive due process,&#8221; invented out of thin air by the court more than 50 years after the ratification of the amendment.</p> <p>There is some basis to argue that the 14th Amendment was intended to incorporate the Bill of Rights onto the states. The operative clause of the amendment reads, &#8220;No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.&#8221; The question is: are the provisions of the Bill of Rights included in the 14th Amendment&#8217;s &#8220;privileges and immunities?&#8221;</p> <p>In my educated opinion, the answer is no. The 14th Amendment was intended to constitutionalize the <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reconstruction/activism/ps_1866.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Civil Rights Act of 1866</a>. This was asserted over and over again both in the congressional debates and as supporters presented the amendment to the states. The civil rights act specifically enumerates the privileges and immunities that were to be protected. (The privileges and immunities listed in the Supreme Court case <a href="http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a4_2_1s18.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Corfield v Coryell</em></a> were also mentioned in debates.) They include the right to enter into contracts, own property, inherit property, travel freely and access to the courts. The act made no mention of the Bill of Rights.</p> <p>In fact, in the 1873 <em>Slaughterhouse</em> case, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the idea that the privileges and immunities clause in the 14th Amendment applied the Bill of Rights to the states.</p> <blockquote><p><em>Was it the purpose of the fourteenth amendment, by the simple declaration that no State should make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, to transfer the security and protection of all the civil rights which we have mentioned, from the States to the Federal government? And where it is declared that Congress Shall have the power to enforce that article, was it intended to bring within the power of Congress the entire domain of civil rights heretofore belonging exclusively to the States?</em></p> <p><em>We are convinced that no such results were intended by the Congress which proposed these amendments, nor by the legislatures of the States which ratified them.</em></p></blockquote> <p>This is why the Court later made up the concept of &#8220;substantive due process&#8221; to justify incorporation. The previous Court had closed the door on basing it on the more logical privileges and immunities clause.</p> <p>I admit there exists some evidence that undermines my view on incorporation through the privileges and immunities clause. But the concept of substantive due process is every bit a product of &#8220;<a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/07/19/constitution-101-living-and-breathing-is-the-same-as-dead/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">living breathing</a>&#8221; constitutional interpretation as any progressive Court opinion conjured up during the New Deal.</p> <p>Regardless, incorporation is now the law of the land and is ensconced in the legal system. You can try to use the federal courts to protect your rights from state governments if you choose. But you should at least understand how the idea evolved and what it has done to the constitutional system.</p> <p><strong>Incorporation Breaks the Original Constitutional System</strong></p> <p>The founding generation warned us over and over again about consolidating the states into a single national government. It was the greatest fear voiced by opponents of the Constitution during ratification and was a prime reason for the inclusion of the Bill of Rights.</p> <p>During the Massachusetts ratifying convention, delegate Fisher Ames asserted that &#8220;a consolidation of the States would subvert the new Constitution.&#8221; And <a href="https://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_va_07.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">during the Virginia ratifying convention, Patrick Henry warned</a>, &#8220;Consolidation must end in the destruction of our liberties.&#8221;</p> <blockquote> <div><em>&#8220;When he asks my opinion of consolidation, of one power to reign over America with a strong hand, I will tell him I am persuaded of the rectitude of my honorable friend&#8217;s opinion, (Mr. Mason,) that one government cannot reign over so extensive a country as this is, without absolute despotism. Compared to such a consolidation, small confederacies are little evils; though they ought to be recurred to but in case of necessity.&#8221;</em></div> </blockquote> <p>Supporters of the Constitution didn&#8217;t defend consolidation. They acknowledged its danger and swore it would never happen. In <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed32.asp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Federalist #32</em></a>, Alexander Hamilton wrote:</p> <blockquote><p><em>&#8220;An entire consolidation of the States into one complete national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them, would be altogether dependent on the general will. But the plan of the convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively delegated to the United States.&#8221;</em></p></blockquote> <p>The incorporation doctrine did what Hamilton promised wouldn&#8217;t happen. It effectively obliterated state sovereignty and consolidated the state into a single national government.</p> <p>Whether legitimate or not, the incorporation doctrine made real the founders&#8217; worst fears. Using federal courts to police the states and enforce the Bill of Rights fractured the original constitutional structure, <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/23/breaking-the-tenth-amendment/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">broke the Tenth Amendment</a> and effectively consolidated the states to be ruled by an oligarchy of federal judges.</p> <p>You can&#8217;t simultaneously support incorporation and the original Constitution. They are hopelessly at odds.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Bill of Rights Incorporation Doctrine 14th Amendment bill-of-rights federal courts Mike Maharrey Tennessee Committee Passes “Constitutional Carry” Bill https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/tennessee-committee-passes-constitutional-carry-bill/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:5a55a317-acba-0032-19a8-c12dd11fa0d7 Sat, 30 May 2020 15:51:35 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/tennessee-committee-passes-constitutional-carry-bill/" title="Tennessee Committee Passes &#8220;Constitutional Carry&#8221; Bill" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />NASHVILLE, Tenn. (May 30, 2020) &#8211; On Tuesday, a Tennessee House committee passed a “Constitutional Carry” bill that would make it legal for Tennessee residents to carry a firearm without a license in the state, fostering an environment hostile to federal gun control. Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland) introduced House Bill 2817 (HB2817) back in February. [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/tennessee-committee-passes-constitutional-carry-bill/" title="Tennessee Committee Passes &#8220;Constitutional Carry&#8221; Bill" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/tennessee-flag-wm-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><strong>NASHVILLE</strong>, Tenn. (May 30, 2020) &#8211; On Tuesday, a Tennessee House committee passed a “Constitutional Carry” bill that would make it legal for Tennessee residents to carry a firearm without a license in the state, fostering an environment hostile to federal gun control.<span id="more-34752"></span></p> <p>Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland) introduced House Bill 2817 (<a href="http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/Billinfo/default.aspx?BillNumber=HB2817&amp;ga=111" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB2817</a>) back in February. Sen. Jack Johnson (R-Brentwood) introduced the companion bill (<a href="http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=SB2671&amp;GA=111" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">SB2671</a>) in the Senate. The proposed law would make it legal for Tennessee residents 21 and older to carry a handgun without a permit. Tennesseans would still be able to get a concealed carry permit they can use to carry in other states that have reciprocity with Tennessee.</p> <p>On May 26, the House Judiciary Committee passed HB2817 <a href="https://legiscan.com/TN/rollcall/HB2817/id/960582" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">by a 16-7 vote</a>.</p> <p><strong>EFFECT ON FEDERAL GUN CONTROL</strong></p> <p>While <strong>permitless carry</strong> bills do not directly affect federal gun control, the widespread passage of permitless conceal carry laws in states subtly undermines federal efforts to regulate guns. As we’ve seen with marijuana and industrial hemp, a federal regulation becomes ineffective when states ignore it and pass laws encouraging the prohibited activity anyway.</p> <p>The federal government lacks the enforcement power necessary to maintain its ban, and people will willingly take on the small risk of federal sanctions if they know the state will not interfere. This increases when the state actively encourages “the market.”</p> <p>Less restrictive state gun laws will likely have a similar impact on federal gun laws. It will make it that much more difficult for the feds to enforce any future federal gun control, and increase the likelihood that states with few limits will simply refuse to cooperate with federal enforcement efforts.</p> <p>State actions such as passing HB2817 would lower barriers for those wanting to the option of defending themselves with firearms and encourages a “gun-friendly” environment that would make federal efforts to limit firearms that much more difficult.</p> <p><strong>WHAT’S NEXT</strong></p> <p>HB2817 now moves to the <a href="http://www.capitol.tn.gov/house/committees/finance.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">House Finance, Ways and Means</a> Subcommittee, where it must pass by a majority vote before moving to the full committee. A hearing is scheduled for June 3.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Right to Keep and Bear Arms State Bills Constitutional Carry firearms HB2817 Permitless Carry second amendment Tennessee Mike Maharrey Arizona House Kills Bill to End Civil Asset Forfeiture https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/arizona-house-kills-bill-to-end-civil-asset-forfeiture/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:4fcc2baf-1a34-76b3-3c9f-536cc9fe717e Sat, 30 May 2020 15:50:14 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/arizona-house-kills-bill-to-end-civil-asset-forfeiture/" title="Arizona House Kills Bill to End Civil Asset Forfeiture" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />PHOENIX, Ariz. (May 30, 2020) &#8211; The Arizona House voted down a bill to reform the state’s asset forfeiture laws and prohibit the state from taking a person’s property without a criminal conviction. The proposed legislation would have built on important reforms signed into law in 2017. Sen. Eddie Farnsworth (R-Mesa) introduced Senate Bill 1556 [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/arizona-house-kills-bill-to-end-civil-asset-forfeiture/" title="Arizona House Kills Bill to End Civil Asset Forfeiture" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/forfeiture-state-arizona-021320-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><strong>PHOENIX</strong>, Ariz. (May 30, 2020) &#8211; The Arizona House voted down a bill to reform the state’s asset forfeiture laws and prohibit the state from taking a person’s property without a criminal conviction. The proposed legislation would have built on important reforms signed into law in 2017.<span id="more-34751"></span></p> <p>Sen. Eddie Farnsworth (R-Mesa) introduced Senate Bill 1556 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/AZ/bill/SB1556/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">SB1556</a>) on Feb. 4. The legislation would have reformed the state’s asset forfeiture laws to require a conviction before the prosecutors could begin forfeiture proceedings in most cases. The bill also included provisions that would increase protections for property owners involved in the forfeiture process.</p> <p>The Senate passed SB1556 with a floor amendment by <a href="https://legiscan.com/AZ/rollcall/SB1556/id/948023" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a vote of 30-0</a> back in March, but on May 21, the House <a href="https://legiscan.com/AZ/rollcall/SB1556/id/959894" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">voted down the measure 37-23</a>.</p> <p>Arizona has some of the most onerous civil asset forfeiture laws in the country. Although prosecutors claim that drug kingpins and white-collar criminals are their primary targets, three-quarters of forfeiture cases involve property valued at less than $10,000. Originally intended to counter organized racketeering, the process of bringing civil charges against property rather than criminal charges against humans has proven very lucrative for law enforcement. This is largely due to the ease with which seizures can be carried out since property has no civil rights and the standards for evidence are much lower in non-criminal actions. Accuse a piece of property of involvement in a crime and it can be taken, sold, and the money used for just about any purpose. Property owners are often unwilling or unable to petition for its return due to the expense and effort involved.</p> <p>For years, various groups have worked to add protections against unreasonable seizures, political corruption, and prosecutorial indiscretion but have faced strong opposition from prosecutors and other law-enforcement officials. The most significant progress towards reforming forfeiture law in the state was made in 2017 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/08/now-in-effect-new-arizona-law-takes-on-state-federal-asset-forfeiture/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">when house bill 2477 was enacted into law</a>.</p> <p>Introduced by then-representative Eddie Farnsworth, HB 2477 required detailed reporting of collections, allocations, and the purpose for each use of funds taken, and placed oversight of each county’s forfeiture operations with the board of supervisors rather than prosecutors. The idea was to shed some light on the massive scale of assets being seized in the state and to remove the conflict of interest prosecutors had to enhance their budgets at the expense of private citizens. Its biggest weakness, supporters say, was that there was still no requirement for a conviction in order to seize property, so forfeitures could be processed even when the state could not prove a crime had been committed by the property owner.</p> <p>This year, Senator Farnsworth introduced an even stronger reform measure in SB1556. Along with requiring a criminal conviction, the 2020 bill included provisions to eliminate administrative forfeiture thus forcing cases to be instead handled by the judicial system, and provided for a prompt, post-seizure hearing for property owners to challenge a seizure without waiting for the criminal trial or forfeiture proceeding to complete.</p> <p>Farnsworth blames the failure of the bill to pass the House on Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich. Despite warnings three years ago to prepare for further restrictions on seizures, Brnovich and other prosecutors waited until this year to raise objections and have gone on collecting and spending in the meantime.</p> <p>Ryan Anderson, a representative from Brnovich’s office, said the attorney general does not object, in principle, to linking property seizures to criminal convictions, but said that the bill had “technical problems,” as written. The AG’s office argued that Farnsworth was using the severely COVID-restricted legislative session to ram-through poorly constructed policy.</p> <p>The biggest points of contention related to a provision regarding the presentation to judges of “clear and convincing evidence,” the property was tied to a crime and the ability of prosecutors to obtain liens against property the state wishes to seize. “Clear and convincing,” evidence is a higher bar than the “preponderance of evidence” standard currently required.</p> <p>Anderson worries that white-collar criminals will simply dispose of their assets before law enforcement is able to get a conviction. Farnsworth counters that prosecutors merely have to place a lien on the suspect property to prevent that.</p> <p>It wasn’t just prosecutors who opposed Farnsworth’s efforts. Representative David Cook, Republican from Globe, claims “The counties that I represent are not using [asset forfeiture] for a cash cow.” He pointed out that county attorneys have discretion to decide when to seize property—something that Farnsworth objects to.</p> <p>Representative Bob Thorpe, a stalwart supporter of forfeiture reform efforts, surprised many by opposing Farnsworth’s bill. Thorpe was not specific in his criticism, saying only that the bill, “needs additional work.”</p> <p>Support for the measure within the legislature came from both sides of the aisle, however. Representative Kirsten Engel, Democrat from Tucson, said that her colleagues understand and support the need for reform but lamented that the legislation was pushed through the house too quickly for a proper review.</p> <p>“We’re not going to shove this through without checking it out,” she said.</p> <p>But that’s something a COVID-driven, early sine die (adjournment) of the legislature made impossible.</p> <p><strong>FEDERAL LOOPHOLE</strong></p> <p>The news isn&#8217;t all bad in Arizona. The 2017 reforms took a big step toward closing a loophole that allows state and local police to get around more strict state asset forfeiture laws in a vast majority of situations. This is particularly important in light of a <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/07/30/states-can-thwart-new-doj-asset-forfeiture-policy/">policy directive issued in July 2017 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions</a> for the Department of Justice (DOJ).</p> <p>A federal program known as “<a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/12/federal-asset-forfeiture-program-helps-local-police-steal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Equitable Sharing</a>” allows prosecutors to bypass more stringent state asset forfeiture laws by passing cases off to the federal government through a process known as adoption. The DOJ directive reiterates full support for the equitable sharing program, directs federal law enforcement agencies to aggressively utilize it, and sets the stage to expand it in the future.</p> <p>Law enforcement agencies can circumvent more strict state forfeiture laws by claiming cases are federal in nature. Under these arrangements, state officials simply hand cases over to a federal agency, participate in the case, and then receive up to 80 percent of the proceeds. However, when states merely withdraw from participation, the federal directive loses its impact.</p> <p>Until recently, California faced this situation. The state has some of the strongest state-level restrictions on civil asset forfeiture in the country, but state and local police were circumventing the state process by passing cases to the feds. According to a report by the Institute for Justice, <em>Policing for Profit</em>, California ranked as the worst offender of all states in the country between 2000 and 2013. In other words, California law enforcement was passing off a lot of cases to the feds and collecting the loot. The <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/09/signed-as-law-california-reins-in-asset-forfeiture-takes-on-federal-equitable-sharing-program/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">state closed the loophole</a> in 2016.</p> <p>According to an <a href="http://ij.org/pfp-state-pages/pfp-Arizona/">Institute for Justice report</a>, Arizona has been one of the worst offenders of this program:</p> <blockquote><p><em>Arizona law enforcement’s use of the Department of Justice’s equitable sharing program results in a ranking of 32<sup>nd</sup> nationally. In calendar years 2000 to 2013, Arizona law enforcement agencies received nearly $70 million in DOJ equitable sharing proceeds, averaging just under $5 million per year.</em></p></blockquote> <p>The 2017 reforms effectively closed this loophole. The law reads in part:</p> <blockquote><p>The seizing agency or the attorney for the state may not enter into any agreement to transfer or refer seized property to a federal agency for the purpose of forfeiture if the property was seized pursuant to an investigation that either:</p> <p>1.  Did not involve a federal agency.</p> <p>2.  Involves a violation of a state law and no violation of a federal law is alleged.</p> <p>Property that is seized in a joint investigation may not be transferred or referred to a federal agency for the purpose of forfeiture unless the gross estimated value of the seized property is more than seventy‑five thousand dollars.</p></blockquote> <p>Reporting in some areas has revealed that 85 percent of seizures received by law enforcement agencies through the federal equitable sharing program did not meet a $50,000 threshold. Supporters view the law’s higher requirement as significant.</p> <p>“While we’d like to see Arizona and every other state completely opt-out of this federal program, an 80-85 percent reduction in seizures through this federal scheme is a huge step forward to nullify it in practice and effect,” Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin said.</p> <p>Requiring a criminal conviction is the next logical step. With the federal loophole closed, the passage of SB1556 would make it virtually impossible for police to take a person’s assets without first establishing their guilt.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Asset Forfeiture State Bills Arizona Equitable Sharing Policing for Profit SB1556 Michael Gibbs We’ve Brought the Founders’ Greatest Fear to Life https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/weve-brought-the-founders-greatest-fear-to-life/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:4c9c64a5-a9c7-b3c6-83a5-33f384304160 Fri, 29 May 2020 17:26:40 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/weve-brought-the-founders-greatest-fear-to-life/" title="We&#8217;ve Brought the Founders&#8217; Greatest Fear to Life" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="628" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-980x513.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-480x251.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1200px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />We have brought the founding generation&#8217;s greatest fear to life. That fear was centralization of power. One of the most forceful arguments against ratifying the Constitution revolved around what founders called &#8220;consolidation.&#8221; They feared that the new general government created by the Constitution would swallow up the states and effectively turn the United States into [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/weve-brought-the-founders-greatest-fear-to-life/" title="We&#8217;ve Brought the Founders&#8217; Greatest Fear to Life" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="628" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-980x513.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-480x251.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1200px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>We have brought the founding generation&#8217;s greatest fear to life.<span id="more-34742"></span></p> <p>That fear was centralization of power.</p> <p>One of the most forceful arguments against ratifying the Constitution revolved around what founders called &#8220;consolidation.&#8221; They feared that the new general government created by the Constitution would swallow up the states and effectively turn the United States into &#8220;one nation&#8221; with all power and authority flowing from the national government. Massachusetts ratifying convention delegate Fisher Aims warned, &#8220;A consolidation of the States would subvert the new Constitution,&#8221; and said too much provision cannot be made against it.</p> <p><a href="https://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_va_07.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Patrick Henry offered an even more emphatic warning</a>, telling the Virginia ratifying convention,</p> <blockquote><p>&#8221; Consolidation must end in the destruction of our liberties.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>Today, their fears are reality. The federal government exercises almost complete control. It dictates everything from your healthcare to how much water flows into your toilet. When some local government in Nebraska violates somebody&#8217;s rights, it becomes a federal case. We even say a pledge calling America &#8220;one nation.&#8221;</p> <p>Henry warned that this kind of consolidation would lead to &#8220;complete despotism.&#8221;</p> <blockquote><p>&#8220;When he asks my opinion of consolidation, of one power to reign over America with a strong hand, I will tell him I am persuaded of the rectitude of my honorable friend&#8217;s opinion, (Mr. Mason,) that one government cannot reign over so extensive a country as this is, without absolute despotism. Compared to such a consolidation, small confederacies are little evils; though they ought to be recurred to but in case of necessity.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>You can judge for yourself the accuracy of Henry&#8217;s assessment.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">Centralization of power: We&#39;ve brought the Founders&#39; greatest fear into reality. <a href="https://twitter.com/mmaharrey10th?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mmaharrey10th</a> <a href="https://t.co/4GL8gVttBf">pic.twitter.com/4GL8gVttBf</a></p> <p>&mdash; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) <a href="https://twitter.com/TenthAmendment/status/1266120186735652864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 28, 2020</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Big Government Federal Power Patrick Henry Consolidation Constitution one nation Mike Maharrey Patrick Henry vs the Stamp Act https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/patrick-henry-vs-the-stamp-act/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:95ac5e55-2388-dfd1-3ec0-843861fff71d Fri, 29 May 2020 17:24:37 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/patrick-henry-vs-the-stamp-act/" title="Patrick Henry vs the Stamp Act" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />On his 29th birthday &#8211; May 29, 1765 &#8211; Patrick Henry introduced a series of resolutions against the Stamp Act. In a speech the following day to encourage passage of the resolutions, Henry made his famous &#8220;If this be treason&#8230;&#8221; statement. A number of them passed, and even the ones the didn&#8217;t were widely published [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/patrick-henry-vs-the-stamp-act/" title="Patrick Henry vs the Stamp Act" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052920-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>On his 29th birthday &#8211; May 29, 1765 &#8211; Patrick Henry introduced a series of resolutions against the Stamp Act. In a speech the following day to encourage passage of the resolutions, Henry made his famous &#8220;If this be treason&#8230;&#8221; statement. A number of them passed, and even the ones the didn&#8217;t were widely published and helped spark the resistance.</p> <p>Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 29, 2020<span id="more-34748"></span></p> <p><iframe width="1280" height="720" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/XIz9sa0woJg" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/07/10/patrick-henry-if-this-be-treason/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Patrick Henry: “If This Be Treason!”</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.constitution.org/bcp/vir_res1765.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Virginia Resolves on the Stamp Act</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-052920:7" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.brighteon.com/192a7370-2e7d-4a8b-85eb-58228b40a00d" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/2522bfb7-3739-4144-a7bf-a38578498061" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/v5z2YdxCzdL8/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/635465699" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1OwGWQXmbgjxQ" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/2593533690911499/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> American Revolution Audio/Video History Path to Liberty Patrick Henry Stamp Act If This Be Treason Today in History Virginia Resolves Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 16:32 On his 29th birthday – May 29, 1765 – Patrick Henry introduced a series of resolutions against the Stamp Act. In a speech the following day to encourage passage of the resolutions, Henry made his famous “If this be treason…” statement. On his 29th birthday – May 29, 1765 – Patrick Henry introduced a series of resolutions against the Stamp Act. In a speech the following day to encourage passage of the resolutions, Henry made his famous “If this be treason…” statement. A number of them passed, and even the ones the didn’t were widely published […] Book Review: Constitution Owner’s Manual https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/28/book-review-constitution-owners-manual/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:f85ca421-5d84-9a32-680c-e6ac42ca847e Thu, 28 May 2020 21:05:52 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/28/book-review-constitution-owners-manual/" title="Book Review: Constitution Owner&#8217;s Manual" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280.png 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />What does the Constitution mean, and who gets to decide? Such a question has been answered in written form by political pundits, lawyers, and academics. Most of these accounts, however, rely upon a pre-determined ideological narrative that routinely obfuscates an impartial view. Defying these trends, Mike Maharrey’s new work dares to answer the question by [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/28/book-review-constitution-owners-manual/" title="Book Review: Constitution Owner&#8217;s Manual" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280.png 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/constitution-iStock_20306051_XXXLARGE-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>What does the Constitution mean, and who gets to decide? Such a question has been answered in written form by political pundits, lawyers, and academics. Most of these accounts, however, rely upon a pre-determined ideological narrative that routinely obfuscates an impartial view.<span id="more-29282"></span></p> <p>Defying these trends, <a href="https://www.michaelmaharrey.com/books-by-michael/constitution-owners-manual/">Mike Maharrey’s new work</a> dares to answer the question by revisiting the writings and speeches of the ratification struggle and draws conclusions only through the records of the framework’s proponents. In the process, post-ratification legal precedents that contravene the original, widespread understanding – whether by executive action, federal laws, and high court decisions – are discarded entirely in an earnest effort to derive the truth.</p> <p>To the contrary of the common trope that the Constitution is merely a living, breathing instrument that can be contorted by the will of the federal government, Mike points out that the document is one of enumerated powers, where the exercise of powers outside of this restrictive sphere are unauthorative.</p> <p>Never intending the meaning of the Constitution to be at the mercy of federal judges, Maharrey articulates that those who wrote and ratified the framework intended it only to alterable through the strictly defined constitutional amendment process. Rather than leave an ambiguous roadmap to future generations, Mike demonstrates that the framework’s most passionate advocates explained the most controversial (and now oft-litigated) clauses in detail – leaving little to the imagination in regard to their purposes and limitations.</p> <p>Rather than accept the portrayal of the Constitution by its fiercest enemies, it turns out, the states ratified that which was assured by the document’s friends.Among the best-researched facets of the book, Maharrey tackles the contentious subject of what was meant by the Constitution’s requirement that the president be a “natural born citizen.”</p> <p>While most contemporary works on the Constitution cover the subject in a style that is strictly partisan, this one goes directly to pre-ratification legal texts and precedents to shed light on a subject that has almost never been tackled in an earnest way. Even though his general conclusion differs slightly from my own view, Maharrey’s book portrays the subject more objectively than I have ever seen in print.</p> <p>Another of the book’s most impressive features is its coverage of war power. In particular, the work describes how the Constitution’s intended to subdue the war power of the American president, and make his execution of the war contingent upon Congressional discretion. Far from replicating the 18th-century British monarch, the founders deliberately lodged all war-making power with Congress, giving the executive the power to carry out war only after it had been first declared.</p> <p><a href="https://www.michaelmaharrey.com/books-by-michael/constitution-owners-manual/"><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-29290" src="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/CONSTITUTION_OM_FINAL-small-198x300.jpg" alt="" width="198" height="300" /></a>Nullification – the now-forbidden principle that Thomas Jefferson characterized as the “rightful remedy” against federal usurpation – is given its share in Maharrey’s narrative. In his most lengthy chapter, the author illustrates the maxim as a natural extension of the founders’ legacy.</p> <p>To counter the mainstream suggestion that nullification was never anticipated or envisioned by the Constitution’s advocates, Maharrey goes back to the ratification debates to prove otherwise. In a manner that has rarely been utilized, he reveals several of the Constitution’s biggest supporters wrote and stated explicitly that the states could act to obstruct unconstitutional laws. Beyond this, as Madison insisted in The Federalist #46, the state governments could refuse to cooperate with the federal enforcement apparatus even when the laws they intended to carry out were merely unpopular (but still constitutional).</p> <p>Maharrey’s new work is destined to stand the test of time, serving to remind us all that the Constitution was once promoted as an instrument to reign in the power over government rather than to justify its expansionary – and often treacherous – tendencies. It is both concise enough to equip layman with a broad understanding of the Constitution and thorough enough to intrigue academics that have studied the document and its history.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Book and Movie Reivews Constitution Founding Principles Constitution Owner's Manual Dave Benner Mail-in voting and the Constitutions https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/mail-in-voting-and-the-constitutions/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:014d0c52-9a30-2e76-8d66-f11d8ae337ee Thu, 28 May 2020 21:00:04 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/mail-in-voting-and-the-constitutions/" title="Mail-in voting and the Constitutions" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />1. As to elections for LOCAL &#38; STATE offices (where no federal elections are on the ballot): What does your STATE CONSTITUTION say? Does it prescribe any particular “manner” of voting? “Manner of voting” refers to a requirement of personal presence at the place of voting and to a show of hands, or voice votes, [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/mail-in-voting-and-the-constitutions/" title="Mail-in voting and the Constitutions" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/us-mail-box-1280-1-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>1. As to elections for LOCAL &amp; STATE offices (where no federal elections are on the ballot): What does your STATE CONSTITUTION say? Does it prescribe any particular “manner” of voting? “Manner of voting” refers to a requirement of personal presence at the place of voting and to a show of hands, or voice votes, or paper ballots, or voting machines; etc., OR voting by mail or by internet or by telephone, etc. The Laws made by your State Legislature respecting “manner of voting” must comply with your State Constitution, or the pretended laws are unconstitutional.<span id="more-34744"></span></p> <p>So! For local &amp; state offices where no federal office is on the ballot; the matter is determined solely by your STATE Constitution and the Statutes your STATE Legislature has passed.</p> <p>2. As to elections for the FEDERAL House of Representatives or Senate: See <b>Article I, §4, clause 1, US Constitution</b>: It provides that State Legislatures have the power to prescribe the “Times, Places, and Manner” of holding elections; but that Congress has an oversight power over the “Time” and “Manner” of election laws made by State Legislatures. [Remember, when Art. I, §4, cl. 1 was written, the State Legislatures chose the State’s Senators to the US Congress – so the “place” of choosing <i>the Senators</i> would be wherever the Legislature met.]</p> <p>I wrote about <strong>Art. I, §4, clause 1, US Constitution</strong> <a href="https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2010/12/05/arizonas-proposition-200-what-the-constitution-really-says-about-voter-qualifications-exposing-the-elections-clause-argument/">here</a>. Under the subheading, The Dishonest “Elections Clause” Argument. Please study that.</p> <p>It appears that Congress has not passed any Laws prohibiting or requiring mail-in voting in federal elections. (If anyone knows anything to the contrary, please let me know.) If Congress has not passed a law prohibiting mail-in voting, then States may permit it (assuming they are sufficiently foolish to do so). Congress does have the constitutional authority to prohibit mail-in voting in federal elections [and to continue to permit absentee ballots for members of the Military, diplomatic corps, Missionaries, etc.]</p> <p>3. And remember: The 12<sup>th</sup> Amendment sets forth the totally different &amp; separate procedures for electing President &amp; Vice-President. We have ignored the 12<sup>th</sup> Amendment for a long time…</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Elections Section 4 Article I Section 4 Clause 1 Mail in Voting Publius Huldah Virginia Governor Gives Final Approval to Bill Decriminalizing Marijuana Possession Despite Federal Prohibition https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/virginia-governor-gives-final-approval-to-bill-decriminalizing-marijuana-possession-despite-federal-prohibition/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:5cb9c487-a494-b618-de0e-12f4e62b3e03 Tue, 26 May 2020 22:54:59 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/virginia-governor-gives-final-approval-to-bill-decriminalizing-marijuana-possession-despite-federal-prohibition/" title="Virginia Governor Gives Final Approval to Bill Decriminalizing Marijuana Possession Despite Federal Prohibition" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="627" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-768x401.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-1024x535.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-1080x564.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />RICHMOND, Va. (May 26, 2020) – Last week, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam gave final approval to a bill to decriminalize marijuana possession with a recommended amendment despite federal prohibition. A bipartisan coalition of senators and representatives introduced House Bill 972 (HB972) and Senate Bill 2 (SB2) earlier this year. Under the law, marijuana will remain [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/virginia-governor-gives-final-approval-to-bill-decriminalizing-marijuana-possession-despite-federal-prohibition/" title="Virginia Governor Gives Final Approval to Bill Decriminalizing Marijuana Possession Despite Federal Prohibition" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="627" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-768x401.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-1024x535.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-1080x564.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/06/marijuana-3065621_1280-e1548778531528-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><strong>RICHMOND</strong>, Va. (May 26, 2020) – Last week, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam gave final approval to a bill to decriminalize marijuana possession with a recommended amendment despite federal prohibition.<span id="more-34734"></span></p> <p>A bipartisan coalition of senators and representatives introduced House Bill 972 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/VA/bill/HB972/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB972</a>) and Senate Bill 2 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/VA/bill/SB2/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">SB2</a>) earlier this year. Under the law, marijuana will remain illegal in the state, but possession of up to an ounce of cannabis will now be a civil infraction subject to a $25 fine instead of a criminal offense. Under the old law, possession of a half-ounce or less is punishable by up to 30 days in jail and a $500 fine. Possession of hash and other concentrates is a felony.</p> <p>The legislation also includes provisions to seal the records of past and future marijuana convictions and bars most employers from asking about marijuana convictions in the hiring process.</p> <p>The bill took a winding path to final approval.</p> <p>Different versions of the bill were initially passed by the House and the Senate leading to a conference committee. The Senate <a href="http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+vot+SV1880SB0002+SB0002" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">passed the final version 27-12</a> and the House <a href="https://legiscan.com/VA/rollcall/HB972/id/946262" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">approved the measure 56-36</a>. Gov. Northam gave his approval to the measure on April 11, but he recommended amendments, including one that would push the date of a legislative study on the legalization of marijuana back one year to November 2021. The legislature rejected the delay, but approved other technical amendments, sending the bill back to the governor. On May 21, Northam signed the bill and it will go into effect July 1.</p> <p>Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) carried the bill in the Senate. <a href="https://www.virginiamercury.com/2020/03/08/virginia-lawmakers-vote-to-decriminalize-marijuana-set-25-civil-penalty-for-possession/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">He said</a> the enactment of the law would be good news for thousands of Virginians.</p> <blockquote><p>“This means close to 30,000 people a year will no longer be labeled as criminals and no longer will suffer the negative repercussions of a criminal conviction.”</p></blockquote> <p>According to a point-in-time study included in a State Crime Commission <a href="http://vscc.virginia.gov/VSCC_FINAL_Decrim%20Marj%20Present.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">report</a>, there were 127 people being held in Virginia jails solely on marijuana charges on one day in July 2017.</p> <p>While the enactment of HB972/SB2 will not end marijuana prohibition in Virginia, it will drastically reduce prosecution and disincentivize enforcement efforts.</p> <p><b>EFFECT ON FEDERAL PROHIBITION</b></p> <p>Under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) passed in 1970, the federal government maintains complete prohibition of marijuana. Of course, the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to ban or regulate cannabis within the borders of a state, despite the opinion of the politically connected lawyers on the Supreme Court. If you doubt this, ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to institute federal alcohol prohibition.</p> <p>Despite federal prohibition, Virginia legalized medical marijuana in 2018 and <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/03/signed-by-the-governor-two-virginia-bills-expand-states-medical-marijuana-program/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">expanded the program last year</a>. Decriminalization of marijuana would remove yet another layer of laws punishing the possession and use of marijuana in the state, but federal prohibition would remain in effect. This is significant because FBI statistics show that law enforcement makes approximately 99 of 100 marijuana arrests under state, not federal law. When states stop enforcing marijuana laws, they sweep away most of the basis for 99 percent of marijuana arrests.</p> <p>Furthermore, figures indicate it would take 40 percent of the DEA’s yearly-budget just to investigate and raid all of the dispensaries in Los Angeles – a single city in a single state. That doesn’t include the cost of prosecution. The lesson? The feds lack the resources to enforce marijuana prohibition without state assistance.</p> <p><b>A GROWING MOVEMENT</b></p> <p>Virginia joins a growing number of states increasingly ignoring federal prohibition, and nullifying it in practice.</p> <p>Colorado, Washington state, Oregon and Alaska were the first states to legalize recreational cannabis, and California, Nevada, Maine and Massachusetts joined them after ballot initiatives in favor of legalization passed in November 2016. Michigan followed suit when <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/11/michigan-votes-to-legalize-marijuana-nullify-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">voters legalized cannabis for general use</a> in 2018. Vermont <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/01/signed-as-law-vermont-legalizes-recreational-marijuana-foundation-to-nullify-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">became the first state</a> to legalize marijuana through a legislative act in 2018. <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/06/signed-by-the-governor-illinois-legalizes-marijuana-despite-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Illinois followed suit in 2019</a>.</p> <p>With 33 states including allowing cannabis for medical use, the feds find themselves in a position where they <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/01/nullification-works-and-they-know-it-good-morning-liberty-01-30-19/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">simply can’t enforce prohibition anymore</a>.</p> <p>The lesson here is pretty straightforward. When enough people say, ‘No!’ to the federal government, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, there’s not much the feds can do to shove their so-called laws, regulations or mandates down our throats.</p> <p>The push to decriminalize marijuana in Virginia underscores another important strategic reality. Once a state legalizes marijuana – even if only in a very limited way – it tends to eventually expand. As the state tears down some barriers, markets develop and demand expands. That creates pressure to further relax state law. These new laws represent a further erosion of unconstitutional federal marijuana prohibition.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Drug War State Bills cannabis Decriminalization HB972 Marijuana SB2 Virginia Mike Maharrey “Necessary” Is Not a Constitutional Argument https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/26/necessary-is-not-a-constitutional-argument/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:71694739-2f7c-4908-d2d2-a8b1f145a381 Tue, 26 May 2020 21:47:10 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/26/necessary-is-not-a-constitutional-argument/" title="&#8220;Necessary&#8221; Is Not a Constitutional Argument" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />I hear a lot of bad constitutional arguments justifying this or that federal action. One common justification for expanding federal power is: &#8220;This thing is necessary! It needs to be done.&#8221; But it doesn&#8217;t follow that the federal government has to do the thing. In fact, the founding generation expected that the states and the [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/26/necessary-is-not-a-constitutional-argument/" title="&#8220;Necessary&#8221; Is Not a Constitutional Argument" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_262533872-republic-dictatorship-sign-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>I hear a lot of bad constitutional arguments justifying this or that federal action. One common justification for expanding federal power is: &#8220;This thing is necessary! It needs to be done.&#8221; <span id="more-29277"></span></p> <p>But it doesn&#8217;t follow that the federal government has to do the thing. In fact, the founding generation expected that the states and the people would do most of the &#8220;necessary things&#8221; &#8211; not the federal government.</p> <p>Tench Coxe was a prominent and influential advocate for ratification of the Constitution and a delegate for Pennsylvania to the Continental Congress in 1788-1789. He later served as Secretary of the Treasury. He wrote three essays published in the <em><span class="ital">Pennsylvania Gazette</span></em> in early 1788 under the pen-name “A Freeman.”</p> <p>In <a href="http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/2069#lfSheehan_head_028" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">these essays</a>, Coxe offered some of the most forceful arguments asserting the limited nature of the federal government under the proposed Constitution. He insisted that many, if not most, of the &#8220;necessary&#8221; things for society would be taken on by state and local governments, not the federal government. He wrote:</p> <blockquote><p><em>“It will be found, on a careful examination, that many things, which are indispensibly necessary to the existence and good order of society, <strong>cannot</strong> be performed by the fœderal government, but will require <span class="ital">the agency and powers</span> of the state legislatures or sovereignties, with their various appurtenances and appendages.” </em>[Emphasis added]</p></blockquote> <p>Why can&#8217;t the federal government perform these things? Because as James Madison explained in <em>Federalist #45</em>, &#8220;The powers delegated to the federal government by the proposed Constitution are <strong>few and defined</strong>.&#8221; [Emphasis added]</p> <p>Coxe drove his point home by listing ten broad areas where the federal government has no authority to act. Several of these are self-evident, but the long list included in the tenth point drives home the extremely limited nature of the federal government supporters of the Constitution promised.</p> <blockquote><p><em>“They cannot interfere with the opening of rivers and canals; the making or regulation of roads, except post roads; building bridges; erecting ferries; establishment of state seminaries of learning; libraries; literary, religious, trading or manufacturing societies; erecting or regulating the police of cities, towns or boroughs; creating new state offices; building light houses, public wharves, county gaols, markets, or other public buildings; making sale of state lands, and other state property; receiving or appropriating the incomes of state buildings and property; executing the state laws; altering the criminal law; <strong>nor can they do any other matter or thing appertaining to the internal affairs of any state, whether legislative, executive or judicial, civil or ecclesiastical.</strong>” </em>[Emphasis Added]<em><br /> </em></p></blockquote> <p>In his second essay, Coxe approaches the issue from the other side, enumerating “what the state governments <span class="ital">must or may do.” Again, many of the items Coxe lists as the exclusive purview of the states reveals just how far the federal government has usurped state authority.</span></p> <blockquote><p><em>“The several states can create corporations civil and religious; prohibit or impose duties on the importation of slaves into their own ports; establish seminaries of learning; erect boroughs, cities and counties; promote and establish manufactures; open roads; clear rivers; cut canals; regulate descents and marriages; licence taverns; alter the criminal law; constitute new courts and offices; establish ferries; erect public buildings; sell, lease and appropriate the proceeds and rents of <span class="ital">their lands,</span> and of every other species of <span class="ital">state property;</span> establish poor houses, hospitals, and houses of employment; regulate the police; and many other things of the utmost importance to the happiness of their respective citizens. <strong>In short, besides the particulars enumerated, every thing of a domestic nature must or can be done by them.</strong>” </em>[Emphasis Added]</p></blockquote> <p>So yes &#8211; a lot of things are &#8220;necessary.&#8221; But that doesn&#8217;t mean the federal government can do them. The federal government remains limited by its delegated powers. &#8220;Necessary&#8221; isn&#8217;t a constitutional argument.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Constitution Tench Coxe government powers Mike Maharrey The Founding Generation Absolutely Rejected This https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-founding-generation-absolutely-rejected-this/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:1ac83bae-f23c-da48-a7f7-a3ac9ed1331d Tue, 26 May 2020 15:46:19 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-founding-generation-absolutely-rejected-this/" title="The Founding Generation Absolutely Rejected This" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="628" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-980x513.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-480x251.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1200px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Most people seem to want a king. Maybe not this king&#8230;but a king nonetheless. Just goes to show how far we&#8217;ve drifted from our founding principles. What do you call a president with vast executive powers who can dictate policy with the stroke of a pen?@mmaharrey10th pic.twitter.com/7GGdLMqunb &#8212; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) May 18, 2020 For Further [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-founding-generation-absolutely-rejected-this/" title="The Founding Generation Absolutely Rejected This" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="628" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200.png 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-980x513.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-480x251.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1200px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/09/constitution-convention-adoption-1787-1200-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Most people seem to want a king. Maybe not this king&#8230;but a king nonetheless. Just goes to show how far we&#8217;ve drifted from our founding principles.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">What do you call a president with vast executive powers who can dictate policy with the stroke of a pen?<a href="https://twitter.com/mmaharrey10th?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mmaharrey10th</a> <a href="https://t.co/7GGdLMqunb">pic.twitter.com/7GGdLMqunb</a></p> <p>&mdash; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) <a href="https://twitter.com/TenthAmendment/status/1262438299492249602?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 18, 2020</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <p><strong>For Further Reading</strong></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/19/why-the-tenth-amendment-should-trump-trump-if-you-want-liberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Why the Tenth Amendment Should Trump Trump if You Want Liberty</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/10/25/constitution-101-executive-power/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Constitution 101: Executive Power</a></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/09/05/does-the-executive-branch-have-too-much-power/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Does the Executive Branch Have Too Much Power?</a></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/11/30/presidential-tyranny-20/">Presidential Tyranny 2.0: Executive Power as the Enemy of Freedom</a></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Tenther Essentials Executive Power President Trump Mike Maharrey 2 Big Mistakes when Reading the Constitution https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/2-big-mistakes-when-reading-the-constitution/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:91793876-e686-66b2-c300-a24a85a79764 Mon, 25 May 2020 18:01:24 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/2-big-mistakes-when-reading-the-constitution/" title="2 Big Mistakes when Reading the Constitution" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Common, dangerous &#8211; and usually from friends to the Constitution and liberty. Path to Liberty: May 25, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes &#124; Google Play &#124; Stitcher &#124; Spotify &#124; RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives Subscribe and Review on iTunes Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Law 1813 Today in History: James Madison Vetoes Infrastructure [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/2-big-mistakes-when-reading-the-constitution/" title="2 Big Mistakes when Reading the Constitution" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052520-b-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Common, dangerous &#8211; and usually from friends to the Constitution and liberty.</p> <p>Path to Liberty: May 25, 2020<span id="more-34736"></span></p> <p><iframe src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/CFozjN0KZKk?start=58" width="1280" height="720" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-06-02-0459">Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Law 1813</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/03/03/today-in-history-james-madison-vetoes-infrastructure-bill-as-unconstitutional/">Today in History: James Madison Vetoes Infrastructure Bill as Unconstitutional</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/08/james-madisons-constitution-two-step/">James Madison’s Constitution Two-Step</a></p> <p><a href="https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/98-01-02-3562">Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 12 June 1823</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/04-03-02-0333">From James Madison to Henry Lee, 25 June 1824</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/88bfcbd7-74a6-42f0-afeb-e242fb8b0967" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/1b70377c-0643-4aca-8a14-d244b0cbfc0b" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/AzgL48855wKJ/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-052520:c" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/631618630" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1ZkJzLRQBvoKv" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/1149349435418092/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><a href="https://dlive.tv/p/dlive-05196520+CDbemDkMR" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on DLive</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Constitution James Madison Path to Liberty Thomas Jefferson How To Reading the Constitution thomas jefferson Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 35:07 Common, dangerous – and usually from friends to the Constitution and liberty. Path to Liberty: May 25, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spotify | RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives Subscribe and Review on iTunes Tho... Common, dangerous – and usually from friends to the Constitution and liberty. Path to Liberty: May 25, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spotify | RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives Subscribe and Review on iTunes Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Law 1813 Today in History: James Madison Vetoes Infrastructure […] Early Americans Would Have Rejected the U.S. Government of Today https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/24/early-americans-would-have-rejected-the-u-s-government-of-today/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:00b76be5-7b34-3e21-e2e6-afcc9b065e7d Sun, 24 May 2020 14:25:17 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/24/early-americans-would-have-rejected-the-u-s-government-of-today/" title="Early Americans Would Have Rejected the U.S. Government of Today" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Our American ancestors did not trust government, and they detested powerful government. <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/24/early-americans-would-have-rejected-the-u-s-government-of-today/" title="Early Americans Would Have Rejected the U.S. Government of Today" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/stamp-act-denounced-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p class="p1"><span class="s1">Even though most Americans are obviously unhappy with the federal government, many of them don’t question the structure of the government itself. Their ire is directed toward officials, not the governmental structure that such officials manage. They are satisfied with how the federal government is structured and just want “better people” managing it.</span><span id="more-29278"></span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">The irony is that if the type of federal governmental structure under which we live today had been proposed to the American people after the Constitutional Convention, there is no possibility that they would have approved it. They would have rejected the Constitution and, therefore, the federal government would never have come into existence.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">For some 10 years, Americans had been operating under a governmental structure known as the Articles of Confederation. Under this structure, there was a federal government but its powers were so weak that it didn’t even have the power to tax. Imagine that: 10 years under a federal government that lacked the power to tax people!</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">The Articles of Confederation reflected the philosophical mindset of our American ancestors. They didn’t want a powerful federal government. They knew that a powerful federal government would end up destroying their freedom and their well-being.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">But there were problems with the Articles, such as trade wars between the states. To fix these problems, the states sent delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. The purpose of the convention was simply to revise the Articles.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Instead, meeting in secret, the delegates came up with an entirely new proposal — a different type of governmental structure, one where the federal government would have more power, including the power to tax.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Our American ancestors were leery, extremely leery. A powerful federal government was the last thing they wanted. But proponents of the Constitution assuaged their concerns by pointing out that the powers of the federal government would be limited to those enumerated in the Constitution. If a power wasn’t enumerated, it couldn’t be exercised.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">With respect to taxation, the federal government could only levy “indirect” taxes. With the “apportionment” clause in the Constitution, the federal government was precluded from levying direct taxes on people’s income. No IRS and income tax under the Constitution.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Americans went along with the deal, provided that a Bill of Rights be enacted immediately after ratification. Its purpose was to tell federal officials directly and clearly that they were prohibited from punishing people for exercising such natural, God-given rights as speech, religion, assembly, guns, and others. Its purpose also was to guarantee procedural protections for people who federal officials targeted with incarceration and other forms of punishment.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Our American ancestors did not trust government, and they detested powerful government.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Suppose the delegates at the Constitutional Convention had come out of the secret assembly and said the following to the America people:</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">We have come up with a proposal for a brand new governmental structure that we would like you to consider. It consists of a federal government consisting of a gigantic welfare state and a national-security state consisting of a Pentagon, a military-industrial complex, a CIA, and a NSA.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Under the welfare state, the federal government will wield the power to tax any portion of your income it wants and give the money to others. It will also wield the power to charge people for this service.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">It will also wield the power to control, manage, and regulate your economic activities. Enterprises will not be free to conduct their activities without governmental supervision and control.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Federal officials will wield the power to punish you if you ingest substances that they disapprove of.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">There will be a giant military-intelligence establishment. These will wield the power to police the world through force of arms, the power to assassinate and torture people, including Americans, and the power to spy and keep secret files on people, including Americans.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">What would the reaction of the American people have been? They would have died laughing. They would have thought it to be one great big joke. Once they realized that the proposal was serious, they would have rejected at once and continued living under the Articles of Confederation.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Our American ancestors would have been right to reject the type of governmental system under which we live today. The welfare-state, national-security state type of governmental system is antithetical to our the principles of government under which our nation was founded. It is antithetical to the principles of freedom. It is the reason why America finds herself in such desperate straits today.</span></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Articles of Confederation Founding Principles Jacob Hornberger You Don’t Have “Constitutional Rights” https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/you-dont-have-constitutional-rights/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:37e8a58b-0d37-6876-691b-382aae487f08 Sat, 23 May 2020 15:46:18 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/you-dont-have-constitutional-rights/" title="You Don&#8217;t Have &#8220;Constitutional Rights&#8221;" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The Bill of Rights does not &#8220;give&#8221; us rights. It puts restrictions on the power of government to stop it from infringing rights we already have. They should have called it the Bill of Restrictions. You don&#39;t have &#34;constitutional rights.&#34; You just have rights. @mmaharrey10th pic.twitter.com/n4eGhOnXcX &#8212; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) May 13, 2020 For Further Reading [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/you-dont-have-constitutional-rights/" title="You Don&#8217;t Have &#8220;Constitutional Rights&#8221;" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/bigstock-Dictionary-Series-Politics-2485903-liberty-definition-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>The Bill of Rights does not &#8220;give&#8221; us rights. It puts restrictions on the power of government to stop it from infringing rights we already have. They should have called it the Bill of Restrictions.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">You don&#39;t have &quot;constitutional rights.&quot; You just have rights. <a href="https://twitter.com/mmaharrey10th?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mmaharrey10th</a> <a href="https://t.co/n4eGhOnXcX">pic.twitter.com/n4eGhOnXcX</a></p> <p>&mdash; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) <a href="https://twitter.com/TenthAmendment/status/1260669142291542016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 13, 2020</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <p><strong>For Further Reading</strong></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/12/14/bill-of-rights-ratified-power-without-restraint/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bill of Rights Ratified: Power Without Restraint is Tyranny</a></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/08/there-is-no-but-in-shall-not-be-infringed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">There is No “But” in “Shall Not Be Infringed”</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.michaelmaharrey.com/constitution-101-the-bill-of-rights-906/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Constitution 101: Bill of Rights</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Tenther Essentials Bill of Rights Mike Maharrey The Incorporation Doctrine and the Bill of Rights https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/23/the-incorporation-doctrine-and-the-bill-of-rights/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:b3b0456c-4bd5-3b13-704b-ded71b669891 Sat, 23 May 2020 15:23:46 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/23/the-incorporation-doctrine-and-the-bill-of-rights/" title="The Incorporation Doctrine and the Bill of Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />In a previous Constitution 101 post, I established that the Bill of Rights was not originally intended to apply to the states. But lawyers and other supporters of federal courts policing rights at the state and local level will point to the 14th Amendment. They argue that it “incorporates” the Bill of Rights and applies it to [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/23/the-incorporation-doctrine-and-the-bill-of-rights/" title="The Incorporation Doctrine and the Bill of Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/shutterstock_238810741-14th-amendment-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>In a previous<a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/10/13/was-the-bill-of-rights-meant-to-apply-to-the-states/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> Constitution 101 post</a>, I established that the Bill of Rights was not <strong>originally</strong> intended to apply to the states.<span id="more-29279"></span></p> <p>But lawyers and other supporters of federal courts policing rights at the state and local level will point to the 14<sup>th</sup> Amendment. They argue that it “incorporates” the Bill of Rights and applies it to state governments.</p> <p>It wasn’t until 1925, some 57 years after ratification, that the Supreme Court mystically found the concept of incorporation in the 14<sup>th</sup> Amendment. In the 1873 <em>Slaughterhouse</em> case, the Court rejected the idea that the privileges and immunities clause in the 14<sup>th</sup> Amendment applied the Bill of Rights to the states.</p> <blockquote><p><em>Was it the purpose of the fourteenth amendment, by the simple declaration that no State should make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, to transfer the security and protection of all the civil rights which we have mentioned, from the States to the Federal government? And where it is declared that Congress Shall have the power to enforce that article, was it intended to bring within the power of Congress the entire domain of civil rights heretofore belonging exclusively to the States?</em></p> <p>We are convinced that no such results were intended by the Congress which proposed these amendments, nor by the legislatures of the States which ratified them.</p></blockquote> <p>When we carefully examine the congressional debates and the arguments during ratification of the 14<sup>th</sup>, it becomes pretty clear the Court was correct in its opinion.</p> <p>The 14<sup>th</sup> Amendment was clearly intended to constitutionalize the <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reconstruction/activism/ps_1866.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Civil Rights Act of 1866</a>. This was asserted over and over again both in the congressional debates and as supporters presented the amendment to the states.</p> <p>Sen. Lyman Trumbull (Ill.) guided the 14th through the Senate. In a speech in Chicago as the amendment was being debated, he “clearly and unhesitatingly declared Sec. 1 of the Amendment to ‘be a reiteration of the rights as set forth in the Civil Rights Bill.’” Martin Thayer (R-Pa.) declared, “It is but incorporating in the Constitution the principle of the civil rights bill which has lately become a law.” Indiana Senator Henry Smith Lane reaffirmed Trumbull’s views, as did several other congressmen addressing their states. West Virginia Rep. George Latham said, “The civil rights bill, which is now a law…covers <em>exactly the same ground</em> as the amendment.” Howard Jay Graham, an advocate of an abolitionist reading of the amendment said, “Virtually every speech in the debates on the amendment – Republican and Democrat alike – said or agreed that the amendment was designed to embody or incorporate the Civil Rights Act.”<br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$13:0" /><br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$15:0" />Those who argue that the 14<sup>th</sup> Amendment was intended to apply to the states primarily rely on Rep. John Bingham, the principle framer.</p> <p>But, as one historian put it, “Bingham is one who used ringing rhetoric as a substitute for rational analysis.” His statements surrounding the 14<sup>th</sup> bear this out.</p> <p>On the one hand, he did indeed argue at times for an enforcement of the Bill of Rights on the states. On the other hand, he argued vehemently against inclusion of the phrase “civil rights and immunities” in the 1866 Civil Rights Act, saying it could be interpreted to strip rights from the states. He was afraid the bill would empower to federal government to force his state of Ohio to enfranchise blacks. As much as northern states wanted to protect the basic rights of freed slaves, they certainly did not want to give up their own sovereignty and power. Bingham himself conceded this point.</p> <blockquote><p><span data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$24:0">The care of the property, liberty and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Federal Constitution, is in the States, not in the Federal Government. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country.</span></p></blockquote> <p>While Bingham was an important figure in framing the Fourteenth, his opinion, even if you can flesh out exactly what that was, does not define the amendment’s meaning. A Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote, “Remarks of a particular proponent of the Amendment, no matter how influential, are not to be deemed part of the Amendment. What was submitted for ratification was his proposal, not his speech.” Bingham’s confused commentary aside, the intent of the Congress was clearly to constitutionalize the Civil Rights Act of 1866, and we must look to it to understand the scope of the amendment.</p> <p>The civil rights act specifically enumerates the privileges and immunities that were to be protected. (The privileges and immunities listed in <a href="http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a4_2_1s18.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Corfield v Coryell</em></a> were also mentioned in debates.) They include the right to enter into contracts, own property, inherit property, travel freely and access to the courts.<br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$29:0" /><br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$31:0" /><span data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$32:0">Sen. Jacob Howard was another figure responsible for bringing the Bill of Rights into the discussion of the Fourteenth, and his role actually carries more weight than Bingham’s. As the spokesperson for the joint committee that drafted the 14<sup>th</sup> Amendment, Howard introduced it to the full Senate in a speech. He mentioned the Bill of Rights in a single sentence after reading the privileges and immunities from <em>Corfield</em> saying “to this should be added the personal rights guaranteed and secured by the first eight amendments.”</span></p> <p>But Howard was not supposed to be the one introducing the amendment in the first place. The committee chairman was sick and he filled in at the last minute. There is every indication that Howard “went off script.” It is also notable that he was one of the most radical Republicans in the Senate and not representative of the prevailing point of view. Howard’s notion was brushed aside as the debates went on. Even Howard later backed off, saying the goal was to legitimize the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It’s also important to note that no mention was made of applying the Bill of Rights to the states when the bill was introduced in the House.<br /> <br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$35:0" /><span data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$36:0">Horace Flack (a supporter of incorporation) did a thorough analysis of “speeches concerning the popular discussion of the Fourteenth Amendment.” He wrote:</span></p> <blockquote><p><span data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$40:0">The general opinion held in the north…was that the amendment embodied the Civil Rights Act…There does not seem to have been any statement at all as to whether the first eight amendments were to be made applicable to the states or not.</span></p></blockquote> <p><span data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$44:0">In fact, had this been the understanding, the people of the north would have rejected the amendment.</span><br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$45:0" /><br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$47:0" /><span data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$48:0">The vast weight of evidence from both the congressional debates and the ratification debates supports a limited view of privileges and immunities as defined by the Civil Rights Act of 1866, not an incorporation of the Bill of Rights.</span><br /> <br data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$51:0" /><span data-reactid=".3u.1:3:1:$comment10154631298020221_10154636307240221:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.0.1:$comment-body.0.$text0:0:$52:0">This is a complex issue that can hardly be covered in a single article. I highly recommend Raoul Berger’s <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Government-Judiciary-Studies-Jurisprudence-Legal/dp/0865971447" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Government by Judiciary</a></em>. It is the seminal scholarly work on the 14th Amendment.</span></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> 14th Amendment Bill of Rights Court Cases Incorporation Doctrine bill-of-rights Corfield v Coryell Mike Maharrey How Asset Forfeiture Drives the Police State https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/how-asset-forfeiture-drives-the-police-state/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:00ccf872-dfea-2132-8921-f0f19926992b Fri, 22 May 2020 17:04:09 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/how-asset-forfeiture-drives-the-police-state/" title="How Asset Forfeiture Drives the Police State" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Civil asset forfeiture is legalized government stealing &#8211; it distorts law enforcement priorities and drives the national police state. Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 22, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes &#124; Google Play &#124; Stitcher &#124; Spotify &#124; RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives Subscribe and Review on iTunes War on Liberty: [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/how-asset-forfeiture-drives-the-police-state/" title="How Asset Forfeiture Drives the Police State" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-052220-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Civil asset forfeiture is legalized government stealing &#8211; it distorts law enforcement priorities and drives the national police state.</p> <p>Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 22, 2020<span id="more-34731"></span></p> <p><iframe src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/Kc3uAj0Y7tg" width="1280" height="720" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/war-on-liberty-an-overview-of-federal-programs-that-militarize-and-nationalize-local-police/">War on Liberty: An Overview of Federal Programs that Militarize and Nationalize Local Police</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-origins-of-militarized-police-from-peace-officer-to-command-and-control/">The Origins of Militarized Police: From Peace Officer to Command and Control</a></p> <p><a href="https://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/introduction/">IJ Introduction</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/19/policing-for-profit-how-civil-asset-forfeiture-has-perverted-american-law-enforcement/">Policing For Profit: How Civil Asset Forfeiture Has Perverted American Law Enforcement</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/06/asset-forfeiture-is-theft-an-overview-of-the-state-and-federal-programs/">Asset Forfeiture is Theft: An Overview of the State and Federal Programs</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/b9dad8ff-ff8b-4cd7-9020-7f2ef9ea0345" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/a100866e-a92c-4a82-a390-dae1e8e2ff2f" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/M43wYaXeq6T9/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-052220:a" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/628662028" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1gqxvEQqgBjJB" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/587870525162570/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><a href="https://dlive.tv/p/dlive-05196520+t5iQKzkMR" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on DLive</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Asset Forfeiture Audio/Video Path to Liberty Police Equitable Sharing Police-State Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 16:51 Civil asset forfeiture is legalized government stealing – it distorts law enforcement priorities and drives the national police state. Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 22, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spoti... Civil asset forfeiture is legalized government stealing – it distorts law enforcement priorities and drives the national police state. Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 22, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spotify | RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives Subscribe and Review on iTunes War on Liberty: […] Law Professor Gets F In Constitutional Calculus https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/21/law-professor-gets-f-in-constitutional-calculus/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:950175ff-650f-3bf4-f3d7-b11a0a269ac2 Thu, 21 May 2020 13:50:07 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/21/law-professor-gets-f-in-constitutional-calculus/" title="Law Professor Gets F In Constitutional Calculus" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />If you&#8217;re going to make a constitutional argument for some federal action, it will prove more compelling if you actually make a constitutional argument. That means pointing to the constitutional provision that authorizes an exercise of federal power. Not making assertions. Not explaining why the federal government needs to take the action. Not telling us [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/21/law-professor-gets-f-in-constitutional-calculus/" title="Law Professor Gets F In Constitutional Calculus" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-I-Choose-You-People-in-busin-39411451-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>If you&#8217;re going to make a constitutional argument for some federal action, it will prove more compelling if you actually make a constitutional argument.<span id="more-29270"></span></p> <p>That means pointing to the constitutional provision that authorizes an exercise of federal power. Not making assertions. Not explaining why the federal government needs to take the action. Not telling us when the government did thus-and-so in the past. Those aren&#8217;t constitutional arguments. If you can&#8217;t point to a clear delegation of power that authorizes the action, you don&#8217;t have a constitutional argument.</p> <p>Kimberly Wehle wrote an article for <em>Politico</em> arguing that we need a national quarantine. The headline declares, &#8220;<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/05/15/national-quarantine-constitutional-261165">Yes, a National Quarantine Is Constitutional … and Necessary</a>.&#8221;</p> <p>But despite asserting the constitutionality of a national quarantine, Wehle fails to make a constitutional argument. She never points to the section of the Constitution that delegates such quarantine power to the federal government. She just asserts that it exists, swirling somewhere in the mystical cloud of &#8220;executive powers.&#8221;</p> <blockquote><p>&#8220;The Trump administration has resisted such drastic measures, shunting responsibility onto the states, but the power is nevertheless within the executive branch, and it can be imposed without violating the Constitution.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>Wehle&#8217;s credentials include &#8220;law professor&#8221; and &#8220;former assistant United States Attorney.&#8221; I expect bad constitutional reasoning from lawyers. But Wehle&#8217;s argument is bad even by lawyer standards. She takes a tact that borders on juvenile, arguing &#8220;one reason the federal government can constitutionally infringe on all kinds of individual rights is that sometimes protecting the greater public good requires it.&#8221;</p> <p>No mention of delegated powers, the limited role of the general government, or the division of authority between the legislative and executive branches. Her &#8220;constitutional&#8221; argument amounts to &#8220;the federal government needs to do it, so it can.&#8221;</p> <p>The actual constitutional calculus is quite simple. Does the Constitution specifically delegate any power to the federal government to institute a national quarantine?</p> <p>No. (The general welfare clause does not give the federal government a blank check to act and is limited by the delegated powers that follow. I cover that in-depth <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/03/29/the-general-welfare-clause-is-not-a-blank-check/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HERE</a>.)</p> <p>Is &#8220;quarantine power&#8221; <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/09/03/necessary-and-proper-not-anything-and-everything/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">necessary and proper</a> for the furtherance of a specifically delegated power?</p> <p>No.</p> <p>That means the power to quarantine remains with the state governments.</p> <p>It&#8217;s important to note that even if the federal government had some quarantine power, it would be vested in Congress. Under the constitutional system, the legislative branch passes laws. The president merely executes them. He has no authority to will a policy into existence with the stroke of a pen. In an essay known as <a href="https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-15-02-0056" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">“Helvidius” Number 1</a>, James Madison clearly states the president’s power extends only to putting existing law into effect.</p> <blockquote><p><em>“The natural province of the executive magistrate is to execute laws, as that of the legislature is to make laws. All his acts therefore, properly executive, must pre-suppose the existence of the laws to be executed.”</em></p></blockquote> <p>Since Congress doesn&#8217;t have the constitutional authority to pass a national quarantine law, the president certainly doesn&#8217;t have the power to declare one by edict. The notion that the president has some undefined &#8220;<a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/10/25/constitution-101-executive-power/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">executive authority</a>&#8221; to do such things destroys the integrity of the constitutional system and was never intended. The Constitution would never have been ratified if the president had been given such kingly authority.</p> <p>But Wehle doesn&#8217;t seem to rest her argument solely on executive authority. She claims that the president has &#8220;extraordinary powers&#8221; under federal law to implement a national pandemic response program and cites several acts that purport to authorize this authority. But the question remains: where does the Constitution delegate this power to Congress?</p> <p>Short answer &#8211; it doesn&#8217;t.</p> <p>So, the power to quarantine remains with the state governments. This is clear under the Tenth Amendment. Interestingly, the bulk of Wehle&#8217;s argument reinforces this point. All of the Supreme Court cases she cites in support of a national quarantine revolve around state quarantines.</p> <p>Wehle starts with  <i><a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/197/11" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Jacobson v. Massachusetts</a></i> where the SCOTUS held that a <strong><em>state</em></strong> can constitutionally “require and enforce the vaccination and revaccination of all the inhabitants thereof.&#8221;</p> <p>Wehle correctly asserts, &#8220;This category of <strong>state</strong> power is known as the police power, and it means that <strong>states</strong> can enact quarantine laws and health laws of every description . . . to protect the public health and the public safety.'&#8221; She fails to mention that the Constitution does not delegate police powers to the federal government.</p> <p>Next, Wehle notes that &#8220;In 2014, a number of <strong>states</strong> implemented quarantines for health care workers and others who had gone to West Africa during the Ebola epidemic, and two federal courts <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3341375" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">rejected</a> constitutional challenges to the Ebola-inspired mandates.&#8221;</p> <p>She still fails to mention that the Constitution does not delegate police powers to the federal government.</p> <p>Wehle also cites <em><a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/118/455/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Morgan&#8217;s Steamship Co. v. Louisiana Board of Health</a>, </em>an 1886 case in which the Supreme Court upheld <strong>Louisiana</strong> quarantine laws. This is the closest she comes to making an argument asserting a federal quarantine power. The court held that &#8220;all state laws on the subject will be abrogated [by federal law] at least so far as the two are inconsistent.” The court was referring to quarantines authorized under <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/09/07/the-commerce-clause-not-a-micromanaging-tool/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the commerce clause</a>, not quarantines to deal with a nationwide pandemic, government actions that would fall under police powers.</p> <p>Have I mentioned that the Constitution doesn&#8217;t delegate police powers to the federal government?</p> <p>While Wehle fails to make a legitimate constitutional argument for a federal quarantine, she does makes a fair pragmatic case for &#8220;a coordinated federal response.&#8221;</p> <p>&#8220;It is beyond reasonable debate that the current hodge-podge of state and local rules do not go far enough to protect overall public health,&#8221; she wrote.</p> <p>We can have that debate, I suppose, but that doesn&#8217;t change the constitutional calculus.</p> <p>Tench Coxe was an influential supporter of the Constitution during the ratification process. He wrote three essays published in the <em><span class="ital">Pennsylvania Gazette</span></em> in early 1788 under the pen-name “A Freeman.” In <a href="http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/2069#lfSheehan_head_028" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">these essays</a>, Coxe offered some of the most forceful arguments asserting the limited nature of the federal government under the proposed Constitution, and he insisted that many of the things necessary to maintain society would nevertheless be off-limits to the federal government.</p> <blockquote><p><em>“It will be found, on a careful examination, that many things, which are indispensibly necessary to the existence and good order of society, cannot be performed by the fœderal government, but will require <span class="ital">the agency and powers</span> of the state legislatures or sovereignties, with their various appurtenances and appendages.”</em></p></blockquote> <p>So, just because you can make a compelling argument that federal action would benefit society, or is even necessary, doesn&#8217;t mean you&#8217;ve made a constitutional argument. You still have to do the constitutional calculus.</p> <p>Wehle never does. Like any good lawyer, she leaves us with plenty of assertion, supposition and conjecture but she gets an F in constitutional calculus.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Featured Constitution federal-power Quarantine tenth-amendment Mike Maharrey The President Doesn’t Have a Financing Problem; He Has a Spending Problem https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-president-doesnt-have-a-financing-problem-he-has-a-spending-problem/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:2304a5f3-76de-1d7a-a481-1aa4a59822be Thu, 21 May 2020 11:46:10 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-president-doesnt-have-a-financing-problem-he-has-a-spending-problem/" title="The President Doesn&#8217;t Have a Financing Problem; He Has a Spending Problem" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-279x157.jpg 279w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-768x432.jpg 768w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-1080x608.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The national debt ballooned by another $1 trillion in just 28 days. President Trump has promised to deal with the debt if reelected. He talked about essentially refinancing it. But that doesn&#8217;t address the actual problem. $25 trillion #nationaldebt &#8211; and counting. The president doesn&#39;t have a &#34;financing problem.&#34; He has a spending problem. @mmaharrey10th [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-president-doesnt-have-a-financing-problem-he-has-a-spending-problem/" title="The President Doesn&#8217;t Have a Financing Problem; He Has a Spending Problem" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-279x157.jpg 279w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-768x432.jpg 768w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-1080x608.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/02/bigstock-Money-Politics-2749411-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>The national debt ballooned by another $1 trillion in just 28 days. President Trump has promised to deal with the debt if reelected. He talked about essentially refinancing it. But that doesn&#8217;t address the actual problem.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">$25 trillion <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/nationaldebt?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#nationaldebt</a> &#8211; and counting. The president doesn&#39;t have a &quot;financing problem.&quot; He has a spending problem. <a href="https://twitter.com/mmaharrey10th?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mmaharrey10th</a> <a href="https://t.co/K5Ozhirmar">pic.twitter.com/K5Ozhirmar</a></p> <p>&mdash; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) <a href="https://twitter.com/TenthAmendment/status/1259290604019671041?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 10, 2020</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <p><strong>For Further Reading</strong></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/1-trillion-added-to-national-debt-in-less-than-one-month/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$1 Trillion Added to National Debt in Less Than One Month</a></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-federal-reserve-more-lethal-than-coronavirus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Federal Reserve: More Lethal than Coronavirus</a></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/the-founders-warned-us-huge-national-debt-is-dangerous-to-liberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Founders Warned Us: Huge National Debt is Dangerous to Liberty</a></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/29/what-next-trillion-dollar-coins/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">What Next? Trillion Dollar Coins?</a></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/12/that-didnt-take-long-u-s-national-debt-exceeds-24-trillion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">That Didn’t Take Long: U.S. National Debt Exceeds $24 Trillion</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Current Events Economics Tenther Essentials budget deficit Federal Reserve government spending National Debt Mike Maharrey The Founders and Property Rights https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-founders-and-property-rights/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:bbb6155c-9a0b-3927-b289-a966815bdde4 Wed, 20 May 2020 18:13:07 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-founders-and-property-rights/" title="The Founders and Property Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />It&#8217;s sometimes suggested that the Founders did not consider property rights important because the term “property&#8221; was mentioned only once in the Constitution. But this view couldn&#8217;t be more wrong. Path to Liberty: May 20, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes &#124; Google Play &#124; Stitcher &#124; Spotify &#124; RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-founders-and-property-rights/" title="The Founders and Property Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-052020-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>It&#8217;s sometimes suggested that the Founders did not consider property rights important because the term “property&#8221; was mentioned only once in the Constitution. But this view couldn&#8217;t be more wrong.</p> <p>Path to Liberty: May 20, 2020 <span id="more-34722"></span></p> <p><iframe src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/UzdUrCjRnQA?start=54" width="1280" height="720" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.annenbergclassroom.org/resource/our-rights/rights-chapter-24-right-property/">The Right to Property</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/04/04/the-constitution-and-property-rights/">The Constitution and Property Rights</a></p> <p><a href="https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/2703#Otis_1644_836">James Otis 1765</a></p> <p><a href="https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/690#Mcdonald_0010_320">John Dickinson 1767</a></p> <p><a href="https://history.hanover.edu/texts/adamss.html">Samuel Adams 1772</a></p> <p><a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Address_to_the_People_of_Great_Britain">John Jay 1774</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.annenbergclassroom.org/resource/our-rights/rights-chapter-24-right-property/">Arthur Lee 1775</a></p> <p><a href="https://vindicatingthefounders.com/library/madison-property.html">James Madison Property in 1792</a></p> <p><a href="https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/2703#Otis_1644_576">James Otis &#8211; of the origin of government 1764</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/b2f232cf-4a8b-4f57-b4a9-2f89b3c637ce" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/61efdd61-9855-4a16-945b-679ca7aae579" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/m3ugAVflKJPG/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-052020:f" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/626700226" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1mnxeQpLBdExX" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/253205652427451/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><a href="https://dlive.tv/p/dlive-05196520+aozRSrgMg" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on DLive</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Founding Fathers Founding Principles Path to Liberty Founders Liberty Property Rights Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 25:35 It’s sometimes suggested that the Founders did not consider property rights important because the term “property” was mentioned only once in the Constitution. But this view couldn’t be more wrong. Path to Liberty: May 20, It’s sometimes suggested that the Founders did not consider property rights important because the term “property” was mentioned only once in the Constitution. But this view couldn’t be more wrong. Path to Liberty: May 20, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spotify | RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show Archives […] CLEAR Biometrics Wants To Force Employees To Submit To Daily Facial Recognition Checks https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/clear-biometrics-wants-to-force-employees-to-submit-to-daily-facial-recognition-checks/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:16853409-49e8-9c5a-199e-91389e7ad0fa Wed, 20 May 2020 11:46:07 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/clear-biometrics-wants-to-force-employees-to-submit-to-daily-facial-recognition-checks/" title="CLEAR Biometrics Wants To Force Employees To Submit To Daily Facial Recognition Checks" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b.png 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-279x157.png 279w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-768x432.png 768w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-1024x576.png 1024w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />For years, the tobacco industry denied smoking causes cancer. Similarly, the biometrics industry, despite knowing facial recognition destroys everyone&#8217;s privacy, claims it can help stop the spread of COVID-19.  It is like they ripped their marketing strategy straight from the pages of Big Tobacco&#8217;s playbook. Clear&#8217;s plan to force employees to submit to daily facial [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/clear-biometrics-wants-to-force-employees-to-submit-to-daily-facial-recognition-checks/" title="CLEAR Biometrics Wants To Force Employees To Submit To Daily Facial Recognition Checks" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b.png 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-279x157.png 279w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-768x432.png 768w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-1024x576.png 1024w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/09/facial-recognition-local-oakland-sept-2019-b-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>For years, the tobacco industry denied smoking causes cancer. Similarly, the biometrics industry, despite knowing facial recognition destroys everyone&#8217;s privacy, claims it can help stop the spread of COVID-19.  It is like they ripped their marketing strategy straight from the pages of Big Tobacco&#8217;s playbook.<br /> <span id="more-34713"></span></p> <p>Clear&#8217;s plan to force employees to submit to daily facial recognition tests and daily health quizzes before they can go to work will destroy any lasting thoughts Americans had about their privacy.</p> <p><i>Axios.com&#8217;s </i><a href="https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-health-screening-digital-id-48f5ee5b-05c4-4b5e-8fda-4d2f59b946b0.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">article</a><i> </i>describes how businesses can profit by linking employees&#8217; personal health to their faces.</p> <blockquote><p><i><b>&#8220;</b>Before businesses can effectively reopen, workers and customers need to be assured that they&#8217;re unlikely to encounter coronavirus infections. Linking COVID-19 to IDs could make that easier, but to be fully effective, it requires a more vigorous and reliable testing regimen, as well as public acceptance of a new level of tech-enabled health surveillance.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>CLEAR&#8217;s facial recognition/health surveillance program forces employees to submit to CLEAR&#8217;s real-time <a href="https://www.clearme.com/healthpass" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">&#8220;Health Pass&#8221;</a> quizzes.</p> <p><img class="wp-image-34714 aligncenter" src="http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Clear.png" alt="" width="758" height="398" /></p> <blockquote><p><i> &#8220;The system works like this: Using a Health Pass app, people have their identity validated through facial recognition, then they indicate whether they’re sick by taking a real-time health quiz and uploading test results. That would generate a QR code, which can be scanned by some device, like a phone or a Clear kiosk, to allow entry into an office or store within a certain time period.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>Imagine giving a biometric company the power to decide who gets to work and who doesn&#8217;t in real-time? Because that is exactly what Clear wants.</p> <p>Employees will be &#8220;asked&#8221; to download the CLEAR app on their smartphones and then enroll in the so-called free service. I italicized &#8220;asked&#8221; because while it is technically true they will be asked to download the app, they will not be allowed to work unless they use CLEAR&#8217;s app.</p> <p>Imagine a biometric company making deals with businesses to force employees to give up their biometric privacy just to earn a living.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;To enter a business or venue that employs Health Pass, users will snap a selfie to authenticate their identity and take a health quiz on possible COVID-19 symptoms. The company says that it plans for users to be able to link COVID-19 test results with their digital identity in the future.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>As Axios points out, forcing people to fill out daily health quizzes and daily temperature checks after they have been out of work for so long, is no guarantee that people will answer them honestly.</p> <blockquote class="tr_bq"><p><i>&#8220;There&#8217;s no guarantee that a user will fill out a health quiz honestly, especially if the answers could mean the difference between being able to work or not. Temperature checks wouldn&#8217;t necessarily catch the asymptomatic or those in the infectious period before symptoms set in.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>CLEAR claims that forcing everyone to submit daily biometric check-ins and real-time health quizzes makes people feel safer.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;Health Pass by Clear gives employees and consumers the confidence and peace of mind to get back to work, shop at their favorite store, step into a restaurant and attend a ball game&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>The only ones who will feel safer are Homeland Security and CLEAR who will have created a real-time biometric database of millions of working Americans.</p> <p>(Editor&#8217;s note: Given the intertwined nature of the surveillance state, it&#8217;s almost certain this information would end up in government databases. We&#8217;ve <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/12/lincoln-motor-company-likely-feeding-biometric-information-into-federal-databases/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">written previously about CLEAR&#8217;s airport operations</a> and the likelihood it passes info on to the feds.)</p> <p>Forcing employees to take quizzes and undergo thermal imaging scans is really just a workplace smoke screen as <i>OneZero</i> <i>Medium</i> <a href="https://onezero.medium.com/facial-recognition-company-clear-is-going-from-airports-to-your-office-99e9a33fde2e" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">points out</a>.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;Someone can actively have the Covid-19 virus but not produce antibodies detectable by a test, meaning they would be an invisible and active carrier of the disease. In fact, no result from an antibody test meaningfully changes what a person should do in this situation, which is practice social distancing whenever in public.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>The article goes on to say that letting a biometric company, like Clear make public health policies would be a huge mistake.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;If Clear’s Health Pass is widely adopted, it gives a private organization immense power over the implementation of public health policy. That’s especially risky at a time when there are no nationwide public health policies for reopening the country.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>Do we really want to let Google, Apple, Microsoft and Clear shape our health policies?  Big Tech and the biometrics industry are masters at public manipulation. They are making billions of dollars off of our personal information.</p> <p>Allowing Big Tech and biometric companies to dictate who can and cannot work is a dystopian nightmare, unlike anything anyone has ever imagined.</p> <p>The parallels to China are striking.  How long before biometric companies propose businesses require employees and customers to show their <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/green-red-light-china-virus-app-ticket-everywhere-024709518.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">&#8220;green light&#8221; status</a>?</p> <p>In China, residents are required to download an AliPay app that shows businesses, restaurants and malls a person&#8217;s coronavirus status.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;A green light lets you in anywhere. A yellow light could send you into home confinement. The dreaded red light throws a person into a strict two-week quarantine at a hotel.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>A nation held hostage by fear and run by corporate interests who profit from national surveillance is a terrifying prospect.  Can social credit scoring be far behind?</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Facial Recognition Surveillance Biometrics CLEAR facial recognition Privacy surveillance jprivate Policing For Profit: How Civil Asset Forfeiture Has Perverted American Law Enforcement https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/19/policing-for-profit-how-civil-asset-forfeiture-has-perverted-american-law-enforcement/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:5b284c6f-50f0-1404-2925-30e3723f28db Tue, 19 May 2020 21:11:44 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/19/policing-for-profit-how-civil-asset-forfeiture-has-perverted-american-law-enforcement/" title="Policing For Profit: How Civil Asset Forfeiture Has Perverted American Law Enforcement" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />What happens when due process isn’t upheld? Issues like policing for profit. Learn how civil asset forfeiture has been increasing and how it can impact you. <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/19/policing-for-profit-how-civil-asset-forfeiture-has-perverted-american-law-enforcement/" title="Policing For Profit: How Civil Asset Forfeiture Has Perverted American Law Enforcement" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/forfeiture-general-101118-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Picture this: You’re driving home from the casino and you&#8217;ve absolutely cleaned up – to the tune of $50,000. You see a police car pull up behind you, but you can’t figure out why. Not only have you not broken any laws; you’re not even speeding. But the police officer doesn’t appear to be interested in charging you with a crime. Instead, he takes your gambling winnings, warns you not to say anything to anyone unless you want to be charged as a drug kingpin, then drives off into the sunset.</p> <p><a title="cop seizes casino winnings" href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2014/03/18/a-driver-had-50000-seized-by-a-nevada-cop-but-wasnt-charged-with-a-crime-now-hes-getting-his-money-back/#6eb5ca3f4aca" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">This actually happened to Tan Nguyen</a>, and his story is far from unique. It’s called civil asset forfeiture and it’s a multi-billion dollar piggybank for state, local and federal police departments to fund <a href="https://ammo.com/articles/civil-asset-forfeiture-policing-for-profit#slush-fund" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">all sorts of pet projects</a>.</p> <p>With its origins in the British fight against piracy on the open seas, civil asset forfeiture is nothing new. During Prohibition, police officers often seized goods, cash and equipment from bootleggers in a similar manner as today. However, contemporary civil asset forfeiture begins right where you’d think that it would: The War on Drugs.</p> <p>In 1986, as First Lady Nancy Reagan <a title="Nancy Reagan on drugs" href="https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-nancy-reagan-drugs-20160307-story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">encouraged America’s youth</a> to “Just Say No,” the Justice Department started the <a title="what is the asset forfeiture fund" href="https://www.justice.gov/afp/fund" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Asset Forfeiture Fund</a>. This sparked a boom in civil asset forfeiture that’s now become self-reinforcing, as the criminalization of American life and asset forfeiture have continued to feed each other.</p> <p>In sum, asset forfeiture creates a motivation to draft more laws by the legislature, while more laws create greater opportunities for seizure by law enforcement. This perverse incentive structure is having devastating consequences: In 2014 alone, law enforcement <a title="cops steal more than burglars" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">took more stuff from American citizens than burglars did</a>.</p> <p>The current state of civil asset forfeiture in the United States is one of <a title="what is tyranny" href="https://ammo.com/articles/democide-hitler-stalin-mao-state-violence-guide" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">almost naked tyranny</a>. Don’t believe us? Read on.</p> <p><strong>The Origins of Civil Asset Forfeiture</strong></p> <p>Civil asset forfeiture has <a title="how civil asset forfeiture is connected to maritime law" href="https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2017/jul/28/policing-profit-law-enforcement-agencies-abuse-civil-asset-forfeiture/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a deep history in maritime law</a>. In many cases, it just wasn’t practical to bring owners of vessels carrying contraband in front of an American court. So customs enforcement would simply seize the contraband. But in practice, seizure of assets was rare and generally required a felony conviction in court. Often times these convictions were obtained <em>in absentia</em>, but the point is that there was a criminal proceeding and due process.</p> <p>During the Civil War, as part of sweeping attacks on liberty that included Lincoln suspending habeas corpus and obtaining an arrest warrant for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, supporters of the Confederacy had their property confiscated without due process. Civil asset forfeiture was used during the Prohibition Era to seize assets from bootleggers and suspected bootleggers. Even innocent owners had no defense during Prohibition if their property was used in violation of the Volstead Act.</p> <p>In 1984, civil asset forfeiture entered a new phase. The <a title="what is the comprehensive crime control act" href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/98th-congress/senate-bill/1762" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Comprehensive Crime Control Act</a>, championed by then-President <a title="Ronald Reagan quotes" href="https://ammo.com/articles/ronald-reagan-quotes" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Ronald Reagan</a>, allowed for police agencies to keep the assets they seized. This highly incentivized the seizure of assets for the purpose of funding police departments rather than pursuing criminal charges. However, the game changed completely in 1996 – the year of the landmark Supreme Court decision <a title="what is Bennis v Michigan" href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1995/94-8729" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Bennis v. Michigan</em></a> (516 U.S. 442). This ruling held that the innocent owner defense was not sufficient to recover assets seized during civil asset forfeiture.</p> <p>The plaintiff, Tina Bennis, was the joint owner of a vehicle with her husband John. The latter was arrested by Detroit police when caught with a prostitute on a street in Detroit, and the car was seized as a public nuisance. The court found that despite having no knowledge of the crime, there was no violation of either her property rights or her right to due process. <a title="Michigan Gun &amp; Ammo Laws: A 2nd Amendment Overview for Michigan Gun Owners" href="https://ammo.com/gun-laws/michigan-guns-ammo-2nd-amendment-overview" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Michigan’s</a> law was specifically designed to deter people from using their assets in criminal activity, which the Supreme Court found to be Constitutional in a 5-4 decision. The Supreme Court likewise found that there was no right to compensation for Bennis.</p> <p><strong>Criminal Asset Forfeiture vs. Civil Asset Forfeiture</strong></p> <p>Before going any further, it’s important to delineate the differences between criminal asset forfeiture and civil asset forfeiture. The primary difference is that criminal asset forfeiture requires a conviction while civil asset forfeiture does not. However, there are other differences worth mentioning.</p> <p>Civil asset forfeiture is a lawsuit against the seized object in question rather than a person. This leads to rather strange lawsuits like <a title="what is Texas v one gold crucifix" href="https://medium.com/@publicsafety/texas-v-one-gold-crucifix-bc220786f882" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">“Texas vs. One Gold Crucifix.”</a> The legal burden of proof varies from one state to another, but the most common is preponderance of evidence, <em>not</em> reasonable doubt. What this means is juries decide if the state’s case is more likely to be true than not – not beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil asset forfeiture trial, courts can weigh the use of the Fifth Amendment. This is not true in criminal trials.</p> <p>The &#8216;burden of proof&#8217; question becomes crucial when it comes to retrieving property. In criminal cases, assets are returned if the prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused. In a civil asset forfeiture trial, the accused effectively has to prove their innocence to get their property back. Thus, civil asset forfeiture is a highly attractive option for police departments looking to scare up extra scratch in tight budgetary times. What’s more, the accused is not entitled to legal counsel. This is why, in most cases, it’s not economically advantageous to try and get one’s property back. The lawyer fees will quickly eclipse whatever value the seized assets have.</p> <p>A <a title="states graded by CAF laws" href="https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2017/jul/28/policing-profit-law-enforcement-agencies-abuse-civil-asset-forfeiture/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">2015 study from FreedomWorks</a> graded the states on their civil asset forfeiture laws. Only New Mexico received an “A,” after the state passed sweeping reforms with regard to its civil asset forfeiture processes. Over half the states received a “D” or less.</p> <p>Sound paranoid? Keep reading.</p> <p><strong>Civil Asset Forfeiture: Big Business For Police</strong></p> <p>To say that police departments are funding themselves with civil asset forfeiture is more true than you might think. Civil asset forfeiture has exploded since 1986 when total seizures were at <a title="why CAF is undemocratic" href="https://www.splcenter.org/20171030/civil-asset-forfeiture-unfair-undemocratic-and-un-american" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$93.7 million</a>. By 2005, this had passed the <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.forbes.com/2011/06/08/property-civil-forfeiture.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$1 billion mark</a>. That was double the 2004 amount, <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91490480" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$567 million</a>. By 2010, this figure jumped to <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903480904576512253265073870" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$2.5 billion</a> with more than <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903480904576512253265073870" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">15,000 forfeiture cases – 11,000 of which were civil</a>, not criminal.</p> <p>By 2014, this figure climbed to <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://ij.org/wsj-op-ed-dozens-states-enacted-considering-civil-forfeiture-reform/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$4.5 billion</a>, with <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-civil-asset-forfeiture-simply-wont-die/2017/07/25/f5c0c4de-70ba-11e7-9eac-d56bd5568db8_story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$29 billion seized between 2001 and 2014</a>. Between 1985 and 1991, <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/american-forfeiture-law-property-owners-meet-prosecutor" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">federal forfeitures increased by 1,500 percent, an increase of over 26 times</a>. The Justice Department’s forfeiture fund (that does not include customs forfeitures) ballooned <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">from $27 million in 1985 to $644 million in 1991</a>. By 1996, this fund grew to over <a title="civil asset forfeiture profits" href="https://www.forbes.com/2011/06/08/property-civil-forfeiture.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$1 billion for the first time. By 2008, it had tripled again to $3.1 billion</a>.</p> <p>Cash seizures in <a title="Tennessee Gun &amp; Ammo Laws: A 2nd Amendment Overview for Tennessee Gun Owners" href="https://ammo.com/gun-laws/tennessee-guns-ammo-2nd-amendment-overview" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Tennessee</a> have gotten so widespread that <a title="civil asset forfeiture in Tennessee" href="https://www.offthegridnews.com/current-events/tennessee-police-under-investigation-for-taking-cash-from-citizens/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the state legislature has begun investigating it</a>. Traffic stops have turned into shakedown operations. <a title="civil asset forfeiture scandal in Tennessee" href="https://www.newschannel5.com/news/newschannel-5-investigates/policing-for-profit/are-middle-tennessee-police-profiting-off-drug-trade" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Interstate 40 was described as “a major profit center” by Phil Williams</a>, a reporter for Channel 5 in Nashville. Much like extra-legal gangs, police gangs in Tennessee have started engaging in turf warfare over the spoils of civil asset forfeiture. The Dixon Interdiction Enforcement (DICE) and the 23rd Judicial District Drug Taskforce were caught on video trying to cut one another off in their vehicles to stop civilians and search for cash. Indeed, officers were in danger of losing their jobs if they didn’t seize enough cash. The head of DICE admitted that it was funded entirely by civil asset forfeiture cash.</p> <p><strong>Civil Asset Forfeiture Drives Bad Policing</strong></p> <p>Civil asset forfeiture isn’t just effectively a legalized form of theft. It also drives (and indeed, incentivizes) bad policing. There is ample evidence to suggest local smokies use civil asset forfeiture to pad their budgets. For example, a 1994 study found that <a title="how police profit from civil asset forfeiture" href="https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2017/jul/28/policing-profit-law-enforcement-agencies-abuse-civil-asset-forfeiture/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">police delay drug busts to increase the value of a forfeiture</a>. A <a title="civil asset forfeiture helps police budgets" href="https://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit-first-edition/part-i-policing-for-profit/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">2001 study of 1,400 police departments</a> published in the <em>Journal of Criminal Justice</em> found that half of the departments surveyed agreed that civil asset forfeiture was “necessary as a budget supplement.” Far more disturbing is the 2004 report showing that <a title="civil asset forfeiture wish lists" href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1745-9133.12341" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">police departments keep wish lists</a> for items they wish to obtain via civil asset forfeiture.</p> <p>To provide some context, in 2014, the total amount of civil asset forfeiture seizures in the United States was $4.5 billion. The total value of property stolen in burglaries was $3.9 billion. This means that <a title="police steal more than burglars" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">police agencies in the United States are taking more from the American public than burglars</a>. More to the point, all the time police agencies use seizing assets from citizens who are in no way a danger to their neighbors is time they <em>don’t</em> spend tracking down actual criminals. In some cases, it might be more “profitable” for a police department to harass a law-abiding citizen while entirely ignoring dangerous criminals.</p> <p>Case in point: In Tennessee, officers set up a post to bust drug traffickers on a known highway used for muling drugs from Mexico into the United States. However, their post was not set up to stop the flow of drugs into the United States, which one would think would ostensibly be the goal of the “War on Drugs” – to protect American citizens from the inflow of drugs. Instead, the post was <a title="why police bust cars bound for Mexico" href="https://www.offthegridnews.com/current-events/tennessee-police-under-investigation-for-taking-cash-from-citizens/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">set up to bust cars bound for Mexico</a> that might be carrying cash, a far more valuable commodity for the police departments.</p> <p><strong>Civil Asset Forfeiture Targets Regular People</strong></p> <p>Let’s assume that you’re against the War on Drugs and against civil asset forfeiture on principle. So what? Who cares about big-time drug kingpins getting their assets seized by the government? Well, as it turns out, the police aren’t generally taking things from drug lords operating in what are effectively domestic war zones. They’re taking them from average Americans.</p> <p>First, it’s important to remember what the “civil” in “civil asset forfeiture” means. It means that no one has actually been convicted of a crime. Once property has been seized, it’s not only difficult to regain it, but it can also be dangerous for the person who has had their items effectively stolen by the police.</p> <p>Additionally, it’s worth looking at the scope creep associated with civil asset forfeiture, for which there are currently <a title="current federal CAF statutes" href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903480904576512253265073870" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">over 400 federal statutes on the books</a>. This amount has doubled since the 1990s. People who are victims of civil asset forfeiture are many times not even suspected of drug crimes or money laundering. Civil asset forfeiture is applied to crimes like DWI or violating the National Halibut Fishing Act. In 85 percent of all cases, no one is ever charged with a crime, though many people are pressured into signing away their right to a defense in exchange for a guarantee against criminal prosecution. In the case of seized vehicles, between 50 and 80 percent were being driven by someone other than the owner when seized.</p> <p>In one particularly egregious example, a Philadelphia family had their home seized because their son did a $40 drug sale on the porch. In New York City, police seize money from people with as little as $100 in their pocket. A whopping 94 percent of California seizures in 2013 were for $5,000 or less, but the average DEA seizure in 1998 was $25,000 – precisely the cap on what attorneys advise against trying to reclaim due to legal fees and court costs. Indeed, 88 percent of Department of Justice seizures are “administrative,” meaning they were never challenged in court, likely due to the high cost and risk associated with challenging a seizure.</p> <p>In addition to the legal fees being prohibitively high for most people, anything you say in the course of recovering your property can be used against you in criminal proceedings. This includes the nebulous charge of “lying to investigators” that is so often invoked against people once it has been determined that they committed no other crime.</p> <p>It’s a rare moment when the American Civil Liberties Union and the Heritage Foundation come together, but when they do, it’s worth noting. Both oppose civil asset forfeiture.</p> <p><strong>Civil Asset Forfeiture Nightmares</strong></p> <p>While such cases are hardly the rule, it’s worth pointing out that there have been instances of civil asset forfeiture that can only be described as nightmarish. Some examples of the egregious overreach of civil asset forfeiture include:</p> <ul> <li>Sheriff’s deputies in Campbell County, TN <a title="Campbell TN torture case" href="http://archive.knoxnews.com/news/state/civil-rights-lawsuits-tossed-in-torture-of-campbell-drug-dealer-ep-360276252-356782081.html/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">tortured a suspect</a> until he agreed to sign over his assets.</li> <li>In El Monte, CA, narcotics officers <a title="El Monte shooting had no drug link" href="http://articles.latimes.com/1999/aug/28/news/mn-4413" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">shot a 65-year-old grandfather</a> as he knelt beside his bed. They then seized his life savings and hauled his family in for questioning before admitting that no one had any connection to the drug trade.</li> <li>Police in Bradenton, FL have a longstanding policy of coercing drug suspects into <a title="Bradenton FL police coerce drug suspects" href="https://www.heraldtribune.com/article/LK/20061022/News/605240344/SH/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">signing over their assets</a>.</li> <li>In many municipalities, it is policy to seize vehicles from intoxicated drivers who have had no criminal trial.</li> </ul> <p>Nightmarish scenarios aren’t necessary to show the tyranny of civil asset forfeiture, however. While losing a Honda Civic with a market value of $1,000 might not sound like a huge tragedy to you, it certainly is to the woman who has to use the vehicle to get to and from her waitressing job every day.</p> <p><strong>Don’t Carry Cash!</strong></p> <p>One of the most disturbing aspects of civil asset forfeiture is what some have called “the war on cash.” Put simply, don’t be caught with a large amount of cash in your vehicle, even if it’s 100 percent legal,\ unless you wouldn’t mind a budget-strapped local police department taking your wad.</p> <p>United States courts have repeatedly ruled that simply having a large amount of cash Asset Forfeiture Equitable Sharing policing for profit Sam Jacobs Now in Effect: Utah Law Expands Raw Milk Sales, Rejects Federal Prohibition Scheme https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/now-in-effect-utah-law-expands-raw-milk-sales-rejects-federal-prohibition-scheme/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:5ad48dfe-2d69-0de3-32f4-79586959c051 Tue, 19 May 2020 15:58:29 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/now-in-effect-utah-law-expands-raw-milk-sales-rejects-federal-prohibition-scheme/" title="Now in Effect: Utah Law Expands Raw Milk Sales, Rejects Federal Prohibition Scheme" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280.png 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (May 19, 2020) – Last week, a Utah law further expanding raw milk sales in the state went into effect. Enactment of this bill takes another important step toward rejecting a federal prohibition scheme in effect. Rep. Kim Coleman (R-West Jordan) sponsored House Bill 134 (HB134). The new law expands raw [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/now-in-effect-utah-law-expands-raw-milk-sales-rejects-federal-prohibition-scheme/" title="Now in Effect: Utah Law Expands Raw Milk Sales, Rejects Federal Prohibition Scheme" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280.png 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/01/milk-general-feb-2020-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><strong>SALT LAKE CITY</strong>, Utah (May 19, 2020) – Last week, a Utah law further expanding raw milk sales in the state went into effect. Enactment of this bill takes another important step toward rejecting a federal prohibition scheme in effect.<span id="more-34706"></span></p> <p>Rep. Kim Coleman (R-West Jordan) sponsored House Bill 134 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/UT/bill/HB0134/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB134</a>). The new law expands raw milk sales to allow permit holders to sell raw milk cream and butter. The former law only allowed the sale of pure raw milk even by those holding a permit.</p> <p>On Feb. 14, the House <a href="https://legiscan.com/UT/rollcall/HB0134/id/923868" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">passed HB134 by a 60-0 vote</a>.  On Feb 28, the Senate <a href="https://legiscan.com/UT/rollcall/HB0134/id/938571">concurred by a vote of 23-0</a>. With Gov. Herbert’s signature, the new rules went into effect on May 11.</p> <p>HB134 builds on an expansion of raw milk sales Gov. Gary Herbert <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/05/now-in-effect-utah-law-expands-raw-milk-sales-an-important-step-to-nullify-federal-prohibition-scheme/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">signed into law</a> in 2018. Under that new law, a milk producer can sell up to 120 gallons of raw milk per month to consumers without meeting stricter requirements under the current permitting program, providing certain conditions are met.</p> <p>Passage of HB134 not only takes another step toward opening up the raw milk market in the state; it also advances efforts to nullify a federal raw milk prohibition scheme.</p> <p><strong>Impact on Federal Prohibition</strong></p> <p>FDA officials insist that unpasteurized milk poses a health risk because of its susceptibility to contamination from cow manure, a source of E. coli.</p> <p>“It is the FDA’s position that raw milk should never be consumed,” agency spokeswoman Tamara N. Ward said in November 2011.</p> <p>The FDA’s position represents more than a matter of opinion. In 1987, the feds implemented 21 CFR 1240.61(a), providing that, <em>“no person shall cause to be delivered into interstate commerce or shall sell, otherwise distribute, or hold for sale or other distribution after shipment in interstate commerce any milk or milk product in final package form for direct human consumption unless the product has been pasteurized.”</em></p> <p>Not only do the feds ban the transportation of raw milk across state lines; they also claim the authority to ban unpasteurized milk <em>within the borders of a state</em>.</p> <p>“It is within HHS’s authority…to institute an intrastate ban [on unpasteurized milk] as well,” FDA officials wrote in response to a <a href="http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund </a>lawsuit against the agency over the interstate ban.</p> <p>The FDA clearly wants complete prohibition of raw milk and some insiders say it’s only a matter of time before the feds try to institute an absolute ban. Armed raids by FDA agents on companies like Rawsome Foods back in 2011 and Amish farms over the last few years also indicate this scenario may not be too far off.</p> <p>When states allow the sale of raw milk within their borders, it takes an important step toward nullifying this federal prohibition scheme.</p> <p>We saw this demonstrated dramatically in states that legalized industrial hemp even as the federal government maintained virtual prohibition. When states authorized production, farmers began growing industrial hemp, even in the face of a federal ban. Despite facing the possibility of federal prosecution, some growers were still willing to step into the void and begin cultivating the plant once the state removed its barriers. Eventually, the pressure on the feds led to <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/12/26/feds-legalize-hemp-but-not-cbd-states-can-continue-to-nullify-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the repeal of hemp prohibition</a>.</p> <p>In the same way, removing state barriers to raw milk consumption, sale and production would undoubtedly spur the creation of new markets for unpasteurized dairy products, no matter what the feds claim the power to do.</p> <p>It could ultimately nullify the interstate ban as well. If all 50 states allow raw milk, markets within the states could easily grow to the point that local sales would render the federal ban on interstate commerce pointless. And history indicates the feds do not have the resources to stop people from transporting raw milk across state lines – especially if multiple states start legalizing it. Growing markets will quickly overwhelm any federal enforcement attempts.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Raw Milk State Bills FDA food sovereignty HB134 unpasteurized milk Utah Mike Maharrey Surveillance in the Age of Coronavirus https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/surveillance-in-the-age-of-coronavirus/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:204a4f10-3616-1016-a303-527f3a68089d Tue, 19 May 2020 15:48:19 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/surveillance-in-the-age-of-coronavirus/" title="Surveillance in the Age of Coronavirus" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-279x157.png 279w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-768x432.png 768w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1024x576.png 1024w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Never let a crisis go to waste is the mantra of big government and the coronavirus pandemic has created the perfect opportunity to expand the surveillance state. I talked with C. Mitchel Shaw about it on a recent episode of the Enemy of the [Surveillance] State podcast. Mitch and I talked about how the massive [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/surveillance-in-the-age-of-coronavirus/" title="Surveillance in the Age of Coronavirus" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280.png 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-279x157.png 279w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-768x432.png 768w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1024x576.png 1024w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/05/surveillance-stencil-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Never let a crisis go to waste is the mantra of big government and the coronavirus pandemic has created the perfect opportunity to expand the surveillance state. I talked with C. Mitchel Shaw about it on a recent episode of the Enemy of the [Surveillance] State podcast. <span id="more-34710"></span></p> <p><iframe title=" 11 – COVID-19 Surveillance Redux with Michael Maharrey" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/r6fnq-dce578-pb?from=share&#038;skin=1&#038;share=1&#038;fonts=Helvetica&#038;download=1&#038;version=1&#038;skin=1&#038;btn-skin=107" height="122" width="100%" style="border: none; user-select: auto;" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe></p> <p>Mitch and I talked about how the massive surveillance apparatus already in place before the pandemic and how coronavirus provides the perfect opportunity for the government to test it out. The crisis also sets the stage for an expansion of the surveillance state, similar to what we saw after 9-11. Mitch and I also touch on just how invasive location tracking is, the notion that we shouldn&#8217;t worry about surveillance if &#8220;we have nothing to hide,&#8221; the use of &#8220;stingray&#8221; devices, and we talk about some practical ways to take on the surveillance state</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Interviews Coronavirus Fourth Amendment Privacy surveillance Mike Maharrey Government Help: Breaking Your Legs and Giving you a Crutch https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/government-help-breaking-your-legs-and-giving-you-a-crutch/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:a9c17b35-3b43-5249-e91d-edb71c7efc66 Mon, 18 May 2020 18:23:22 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/government-help-breaking-your-legs-and-giving-you-a-crutch/" title="Government Help: Breaking Your Legs and Giving you a Crutch" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />From the economy, health care, education and even safety &#8211; government &#8220;help&#8221; usually involves one big caveat &#8211; many of the problems were caused by government programs in the first place. Going to the government to fix problems created by the government isn&#8217;t just bad strategy, it&#8217;s dangerous Path to Liberty: May 18, 2020 PODCAST [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/government-help-breaking-your-legs-and-giving-you-a-crutch/" title="Government Help: Breaking Your Legs and Giving you a Crutch" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051820-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>From the economy, health care, education and even safety &#8211; government &#8220;help&#8221; usually involves one big caveat &#8211; many of the problems were caused by government programs in the first place. Going to the government to fix problems created by the government isn&#8217;t just bad strategy, it&#8217;s dangerous</p> <p>Path to Liberty: May 18, 2020 <span id="more-34707"></span></p> <p><iframe src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/0vP3QHoZ6NA?start=57" width="1280" height="720" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://original.antiwar.com/harry-browne/2002/04/12/a-solution-for-the-middle-east/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A Solution for the Middle East</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/meat-supply-chain-problems-congress-broke-it-50-years-ago/">Meat Supply Chain Problems? Congress Broke it 50 Years Ago</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/17/government-help-breaking-your-legs-and-giving-you-a-wheelchair/">Government Help: Breaking Your Legs and Giving You a Wheelchair</a></p> <p><a href="https://mises.org/wire/federal-deficit-setting-new-records-spending-explodes" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">The Federal Deficit Is Setting New Records as Spending Explodes</a></p> <p><a href="https://mises.org/wire/how-central-banks-and-lockdowns-are-making-crisis-worse" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">How Central Banks and Lockdowns Are Making the Crisis Worse</a></p> <p><a href="https://fee.org/articles/panic-has-led-to-government-cures-that-are-worse-than-the-disease-history-shows/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Panic Has Led to Government “Cures” That Are Worse than the Disease, History Shows</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2019/09/13/opinion-government-makes-problems-worse/2303452001/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Opinion: Government makes problems worse</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/b6567a36-c2c3-41a2-ad5d-689562552f31" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/e539d0cd-4f17-431c-b69f-184a69094077" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/x2OfXOZcF0wl/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-051820:0" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/624797789" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1rmxPAkOQonKN" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/580285582625298/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Current Events Economics Path to Liberty Economy Federal Reserve Harry Browne Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 30:58 From the economy, health care, education and even safety – government “help” usually involves one big caveat – many of the problems were caused by government programs in the first place. Going to the government to fix problems created by the government... From the economy, health care, education and even safety – government “help” usually involves one big caveat – many of the problems were caused by government programs in the first place. Going to the government to fix problems created by the government isn’t just bad strategy, it’s dangerous Path to Liberty: May 18, 2020 PODCAST […] Most Americans Want a King instead of a Constitutionally-Limited President https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/most-americans-want-a-king-instead-of-a-constitutionally-limited-president/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:1f3549da-58f2-97be-b008-777ff9a2bc32 Mon, 18 May 2020 09:51:35 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/most-americans-want-a-king-instead-of-a-constitutionally-limited-president/" title="Most Americans Want a King instead of a Constitutionally-Limited President" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />I really get the feeling that most people in America want a king &#8211; a president with absolute authority to bark orders and everyone has to comply. Ironically, the American colonists fought a bloody war to escape such a system. I really get the feeling that most people in America want a king &#8211; a [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/most-americans-want-a-king-instead-of-a-constitutionally-limited-president/" title="Most Americans Want a King instead of a Constitutionally-Limited President" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/king-crown-pillow-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>I really get the feeling that most people in America want a king &#8211; a president with absolute authority to bark orders and everyone has to comply. Ironically, the American colonists fought a bloody war to escape such a system.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">I really get the feeling that most people in America want a king &#8211; a president with absolute authority to bark orders and everyone has to comply. <a href="https://twitter.com/mmaharrey10th?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mmaharrey10th</a> <a href="https://t.co/lTyh9pYGl0">pic.twitter.com/lTyh9pYGl0</a></p> <p>&mdash; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) <a href="https://twitter.com/TenthAmendment/status/1255939515807494147?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 30, 2020</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <p><strong>Further Reading</strong></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/19/why-the-tenth-amendment-should-trump-trump-if-you-want-liberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Why the Tenth Amendment Should Trump Trump if You Want Liberty</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2015/10/25/constitution-101-executive-power/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Constitution 101: Executive Power</a></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/09/05/does-the-executive-branch-have-too-much-power/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Does the Executive Branch Have Too Much Power?</a></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/11/30/presidential-tyranny-20/">Presidential Tyranny 2.0: Executive Power as the Enemy of Freedom</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Tenther Essentials Constitution Executive Power Mike Maharrey Government Help: Breaking Your Legs and Giving You a Wheelchair https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/17/government-help-breaking-your-legs-and-giving-you-a-wheelchair/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:78eaa6c3-ae04-9a0b-f5a7-5379ebba20b9 Sun, 17 May 2020 08:58:28 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/17/government-help-breaking-your-legs-and-giving-you-a-wheelchair/" title="Government Help: Breaking Your Legs and Giving You a Wheelchair" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280.png 1280w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Remember all of the government bailouts and stimulus in response to the 2008 financial crisis? Conservatives threw a fit. The Tea Party movement grew out of worry about the impact of all of the stimulus, money-printing, and the taxes they knew were coming down the pike. My, how things have changed in 12 short years [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/17/government-help-breaking-your-legs-and-giving-you-a-wheelchair/" title="Government Help: Breaking Your Legs and Giving You a Wheelchair" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280.png 1280w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/shutterstock_56310223-uncle-sam-poster-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Remember all of the government bailouts and stimulus in response to the 2008 financial crisis? Conservatives threw a fit. The Tea Party movement grew out of worry about the impact of all of the stimulus, money-printing, and the taxes they knew were coming down the pike.</p> <p>My, how things have changed in 12 short years &#8212; and with a Republican sitting in the Oval Office.<span id="more-29229"></span></p> <p>Today, pretty much everybody supports the stimulus and bailouts gushing out of Washington D.C. even though they dwarf anything imagined during the Obama administration.</p> <p>&#8220;This is different!&#8221; so we&#8217;re told. Government policy set up the 2008 financial crisis and a lot of “bad actors” got bailed out. The Obama stimulus undermined the free market!</p> <p>But now we&#8217;re being told that you can&#8217;t pin <em>this</em> economic meltdown on the government. You can’t blame anybody for coronavirus. This crisis really is too big for the free market to handle. Government needs to step in.</p> <p>But the truth is big government set the stage for this economic meltdown just like it set the stage for the 2008 financial crisis. This is a prime example of the government breaking your legs and then giving you a wheelchair.</p> <p>Don&#8217;t let the irony get lost on you. Government intervention in the economy set things up for a crisis like this. Now virtually everybody thinks we need the government because the free market can’t handle a crisis like this. Even people who claim to favor free markets are pushing for the bailouts.</p> <p>A healthy economy could weather the coronavirus. In a truly free market, businesses and consumers would have savings. These government shutdowns would stress a healthy economy, but they wouldn&#8217;t kill it.</p> <p>But we don&#8217;t have a free market.</p> <p>We have a central bank that manipulates interest rates and a bloated government that taxes, borrows and spends us into oblivion. As a result, the United States went into the coronavirus pandemic with a bubble economy built on a mountain of debt.</p> <p>By holding interest rates at artificially low levels for more than a decade after the 2008 financial crisis, the Federal Reserve incentivized borrowing. As a result, <a href="https://schiffgold.com/key-gold-news/consumer-debt-was-already-surging-before-coronavirus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">consumer debt</a>, <a href="https://schiffgold.com/key-gold-news/corporate-debt-a-slow-motion-train-wreck/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">corporate debt</a> and the <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/02/15/full-speed-to-a-fiscal-cliff-national-debt-hits-22-trillion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">national debt</a> were all at record levels before COVID-19 reared its ugly head.</p> <p>Meanwhile, the federal government was already spending trillions of dollars to prop up the economy. The Trump administration was on track to run a $1 trillion budget deficit in 2020 before the pandemic. This is the kind of budget deficit one would expect to see during a major economic downturn. The federal government has only run deficits over $1 trillion in four fiscal years, all during the Great Recession. The current Congress and the Trump administration were approaching that number before the pandemic, despite having what Trump kept calling “<a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/08/01/smoke-and-mirrors-the-greatest-economy-is-built-on-spending-and-debt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the greatest economy in the history of America</a>.”</p> <p>The Fed facilitates this deficit spending by monetizing the debt &#8211; buying U.S. Treasury bonds on the open market with money created out of thin air. Without the Fed backstopping the financial system and effectively printing money, the U.S. government wouldn&#8217;t have the ability to borrow and spend as it does.</p> <p>Meanwhile, the tax burden necessary to sustain big-government spending policies stresses family and corporate budgets to the breaking point. When people have to hand a big percentage of their income to the taxman, it becomes that much more difficult to save for a rainy day &#8211; or a government shutdown of the economy.</p> <p>And why save when you can borrow? Artificially low interest rates make it easy to borrow and pointless to save. You get no return on your savings. Might as well borrow and spend now.</p> <p>This is all well-and-good until the economy hits a bump in the road like the coronavirus pandemic. Suddenly you have no income, no savings and a massive pile of debt. It doesn&#8217;t take long to go from a hiccup to a full-blown crisis.</p> <p>This is where the United States finds itself today. After a decade of easy-money and borrowing, coupled with out of control spending in Washington D.C., the coronavirus shutdowns popped the economic bubble that the government helped create. Now the air is coming out and everybody is turning to the government to bail them out.</p> <p>That&#8217;s not to say the coronavirus shutdowns would have been a walk in the park if the economy wasn&#8217;t already broken. But a healthy economy could have weathered the storm. If the Fed hadn&#8217;t intervened in the economy, people wouldn&#8217;t have been able to bury themselves in debt. If the government wasn’t levying high taxes on corporate earnings, companies would have had more money saved to push through a crisis. If people didn’t rely on government programs like Social Security for their savings, they could have saved money on their own and they would have had it to tap into during this crisis.</p> <p>This is <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/05/23/how-the-fed-wrecks-the-economy/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the exact same set of policies that set up the 2008 financial crisis</a>. The government and the central bank doubled-down after &#8217;08 with some political backlash from the right. This time, the government is quadrupling down with pretty much everybody on board. Peter Schiff summed up the situation perfectly in a recent podcast.</p> <blockquote><p>&#8220;It’s the government that crippled the economy in the first place. The solution – the answer to that –  is not to have a bigger government crutch so we can hobble around. How about getting rid of all of that government? Liberating the economy from the dead weight of government.”</p></blockquote> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Economy Government Coronavirus Federal Reserve Government Spending taxes Mike Maharrey The COVID-19 War on Liberty Has Been Brewing for Years https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/16/the-covid-19-war-on-liberty-has-been-brewing-for-years/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:c3c566ae-ce14-860b-7d57-401a99c7b0ea Sat, 16 May 2020 09:45:33 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/16/the-covid-19-war-on-liberty-has-been-brewing-for-years/" title="The COVID-19 War on Liberty Has Been Brewing for Years" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="628" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road.png 1200w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road-980x513.png 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road-480x251.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1200px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The war being waged against our rights under the pretext of controlling infectious disease is not new and didn’t arise with COVID-19. Vaccine freedom advocates have been fighting this war for years, attempting to protect those rights. With their experience, they have a wealth of information that can be drawn upon in the fight. Many [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/16/the-covid-19-war-on-liberty-has-been-brewing-for-years/" title="The COVID-19 War on Liberty Has Been Brewing for Years" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="628" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road.png 1200w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road-980x513.png 980w, https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road-480x251.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1200px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/shutterstock_157382633-gridlock-road-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>The war being waged against our rights under the pretext of controlling infectious disease is <em>not </em>new and didn’t arise with COVID-19. Vaccine freedom advocates have been fighting this war for years, attempting to protect those rights. With their experience, they have a wealth of information that can be drawn upon in the fight.<span id="more-29254"></span></p> <p>Many libertarians and conservatives have expressed the view that the current government repression related to COVID-19 is a “new war” on our rights. I respectfully disagree. <em>There is nothing new about this war.</em> It’s a continuation of highly concerted efforts by the state and their corporate cronies to strip away rights based upon a scientific narrative that is <a href="https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/vaccination-as-orthodoxy-conflicts-of-interest-undermine-childrens-health-part-i/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">riddled with</a> conflicts of interest and pharmaceutical industry influence, under the guise of protecting Americans from infectious disease.</p> <p>I’m a libertarian. I’ve voiced opposition to vaccine mandates. The second statement can’t be inferred from the first, as many libertarians have voiced little to no opposition to vaccine mandates.</p> <p>This article shall serve as my confession of sorts, to an error that I and others in the vaccine freedom movement may have made in presenting our case for opposing vaccine mandates, and also as my rallying cry to fellow libertarians regarding this war that has been raging for years.</p> <p><strong>Rights have already been stripped away under the pretext of protecting Americans from infectious diseases.</strong></p> <p>The tendency of libertarians to frame the COVID-19 rights battle as something new, which is separate and distinct from the rights battle which has been fought for years by vaccine freedom advocates, is misguided. In fact, COVID-19 is just another in a long line of infectious diseases being used as a pretext to strip Americans of their rights.</p> <p>Our youngest and most vulnerable, our children, were the first victims in this war. They were victimized when, based upon a scientific narrative that is not supported by the weight of the scientific evidence, vaccinates were mandated upon them and unvaccinated children were stripped of the right to attend public schools and, in some locations, private schools.</p> <p>These “lockouts” of unvaccinated children from schools were a precursor to the lockdowns that Americans of all ages are now experiencing and, for those of us paying attention, they served as a forewarning of what was coming.</p> <p><em>The history of child vaccine mandates is discussed at length in my prior articles, including one entitled “</em><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/26/central-planning-of-your-immune-system-is-dangerous/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Central Planning of Your Immune System is Dangerous</em></a><em>” and won’t be extensively discussed in the instant article.</em></p> <p>Libertarians in the vaccine freedom movement have asserted to their fellow libertarians for years that the scientific evidence does <em>not</em> support the frightening risk levels portrayed by the state and its corporate cronies concerning unvaccinated children and the infectious diseases parents are forced to vaccinate their children against. These arguments generally fell on disinterested ears and most libertarians have not put significant effort, or any effort at all, into opposing vaccine mandates. Hopefully, libertarians will reconsider these arguments in light of the recent, obviously inflated risk levels being associated by these same state and corporate players to COVID-19.</p> <p>Perhaps healthy, vibrant libertarian adults forced to wear masks and locked in their homes during COVID-19 madness, due to exaggerated risk levels, will take a fresh look at unvaccinated children and consider whether any potential risks they pose to society have also been exaggerated and subject to a similar madness. Perhaps they’ll also reconsider whether or not they should actively join the fight against vaccine mandates.</p> <p>Although prior to COVID-19, U.S. adults had generally not yet been stripped of rights based upon the pretext of infectious disease (except for parental, decision-making rights regarding their children’s vaccinations), those of us in the vaccine freedom movement repeatedly warned that the battle plan of the state and its corporate cronies has a next phase, which clearly includes smashing rights belonging to <em>both children and adults</em>. We explained that this next phase will include <a href="https://thevaccinereaction.org/2016/09/cdc-aims-for-unprecedented-expansion-of-policing-powers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">tracking and monitoring</a>, restrictions on <a href="https://thevaccinereaction.org/2016/09/cdc-aims-for-unprecedented-expansion-of-policing-powers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the right to travel</a> and assemble, restrictions on the right <a href="https://www.jeffereyjaxen.com/blog/argentinas-new-vaccine-law-blueprint-for-american-real-id" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">to use state services</a> and to do other things based upon vaccine status and forced vaccinations for <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/10/01/vaccine-mandates-a-primer/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">both adults and children</a><em>. </em></p> <p>Soon, COVID-19 will be just another of many infectious diseases for which there is a licensed vaccine. The COVID-19 vaccine will likely be forced upon the entire populace. It will likely be the first of many vaccines mandated upon adults in the U.S., and will likely join the long list of vaccines already mandated upon children. (<a href="https://www.thelocal.dk/20200313/denmark-passes-far-reaching-emergency-coronavirus-law" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Denmark</a> has already passed legislation authorizing forced vaccination against COVID-19, so it’s getting a jump on its COVID-19 vaccine mandate.)</p> <p>The extent to which COVID-19-related repression is inextricably wound up with the vaccine freedom battle is illustrated by the fact that those from <a href="https://mises.org/wire/when-governments-switched-their-story-flatten-curve-lockdown-until-vaccine" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the state</a> and their <a href="https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/gates-and-companys-covid-19-vaccine-boosterism-ignores-significant-sars-coronavirus-vaccine-risks-known-for-over-a-decade/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">corporate cronies</a> have argued that Americans’ release from lockdown should be <em>conditioned upon</em> the masses receiving the future COVID-19 vaccine.</p> <p><strong>I confess to having framed the issue of vaccine mandates too narrowly in the past. </strong></p> <p>One of my goals in writing this article is to respectfully and constructively suggest that some libertarians have been misguided and short-sighted in failing to pay attention to the issue of vaccine mandates. However, before exploring this further, let me first confess to an error of my own.</p> <p>I realize that some vaccine freedom advocates, including myself, have done a less than ideal job in presenting our reasons for opposing vaccine mandates. We started with a tree and ignored the forest. There’s never been a more important time than now to properly frame the issue, in order to prompt action, as the state’s use of infectious disease as a pretext to strip away our rights is ramping up. Therefore, I’d like to take another stab at properly framing it.</p> <p><strong>This is the old, too narrow, overview of the war. </strong></p> <p>For the last handful of years, when trying to persuade fellow libertarians to take an interest in the vaccine mandate issue, my points usually went something like this: vaccine mandates for children exist at the state level; mandates are coming for adults; mandates will likely be issued at the federal level; orchestration exists at the global level to impose vaccine mandates; tracking of vaccine status will be imposed and the ability to travel, use state services and do other things may be based upon vaccine status; the pharmaceutical industry heavily influences the regulatory agencies tasked with regulating them; strong conflicts of interest exist within the context of vaccine public policy; liability has been removed for the manufacturers of many vaccines; special liability rules apply to most vaccine injury claims; discovery isn’t allowed against vaccine manufacturers in the claims process; vaccines are categorized as biologics, not drugs, and are subject to less stringent safety testing then drugs; inert double-blind placebo studies are <em>not</em> conducted on most vaccines; and there’s evidence of far more extensive vaccine injury in the U.S. and elsewhere than depicted by the state, Big Pharma and the media.</p> <p><strong>This is the improved, bird’s eye view of the war. </strong></p> <p>This story needs to be told from the bird’s eye view, which is set forth below.</p> <p>Rights are often stripped away for pretextual reasons. Most libertarians seem to be aware that, although valid environmental concerns exist, the prevailing environmental narrative has been used as a pretext by some in the state and their corporate cronies <a href="https://www.corbettreport.com/bigoil/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">to strip away rights</a>. Libertarians are generally also aware that this has involved the state and corporate players declaring what is “settled environmental science” and acting to suppress conflicting scientific information and voices.</p> <p>However, most are unaware (or were unaware until COVID-19 madness struck) that there is another pretextual reason to strip away our rights that has been hammering away at us (complete with the declaration of what is “settled infectious disease science” and the suppression of conflicting scientific information and voices) that will make the aforementioned environmental pretext look like a mere rookie. This is the great infectious disease caper, which may nearly completely strip us of our rights to privacy, to travel, to move about freely, to assemble, and to decline vaccines.</p> <p>Control of infectious diseases is being used by the state and its corporate allies as a pretext to usurp power and to enrich themselves and they’re using a contrived, controlled fraudulent scientific narrative to achieve this. That is <a href="https://www.corbettreport.com/corona-world-order/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the forest</a> and vaccine mandates are a tree in that forest.</p> <p><strong>The state, the media and Big Pharma <em>did not just start</em> exaggerating the risks of infectious diseases with COVID-19, and forewarnings about this behavior were contained in the vaccine freedom articles, and in the vaccine freedom speeches, that were largely ignored by libertarians. </strong></p> <p>For years, opponents of vaccine mandates have pointed out that the risks of death and serious harm from infectious diseases, both in the past and in modern-day, have been grossly exaggerated by the state and its pharmaceutical company cronies in order to garner support for vaccine mandates, and for other rights violations planned for us, under the guise of protecting us.</p> <p>The example of this risk exaggeration most often cited by vaccine freedom advocates has been the measles and the MMR vaccine. We’ve pointed out that the death rate from the measles virus in the U.S. has been significantly exaggerated to generate support for MMR mandates. Although the CDC <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolescent.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">now recommends</a> for children upwards of 70 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18, many of which are mandated throughout the country, the MMR vaccine is the one that the state and its Big Pharma collaborators have primarily focused upon in their fear campaign to rally support for vaccine mandates.</p> <p>Prior to the use of vaccines, the annual death rate in the U.S. from measles was low, at approximately <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/2138/adverse-events-associated-with-childhood-vaccines-evidence-bearing-on-causality" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">1 in 10,000</a> of those infected. Of course, not every American was infected with measles each year, so the overall annual death rate among the entire U.S. population from measles was even far lower than that. The state, Big Pharma and the media often provide an estimate of the U.S. pre-vaccine era annual measles death rate which is an order of magnitude higher than cited above, i.e., 1 in 1,000. Such calculation has generally based the method of using <em>reported cases </em>as the denominator rather than <em>overall cases</em>. This method is deceptive because measles was generally viewed as a benign childhood illness in the pre-vaccine years and <em>most measles cases were not reported in that era</em>.</p> <p>This misrepresentation of the risks associated with measles is thoroughly documented and discussed in Jeremy R. Hammond’s <a href="https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2019/05/06/how-the-cdc-and-media-lie-about-the-measles-death-rate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">article</a> posted (<em>pre-COVID-19</em>) on May 16, 2019, entitled, “How the CDC and Media Lie About the Measles Death Rate” which can be found on <a href="https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Hammond’s website</a>. Hammond is a well-known libertarian and journalist and his work has focused on foreign policy and vaccine policy.</p> <p>Hammond’s website has a section devoted exclusively to vaccines, which is a repository of articles he has written on the topic, many of which discuss not only the scientific misrepresentations and statistical sleights of hand specifically being used with respect to infectious disease death rates, but also regarding the larger issues concerning the necessity for, the efficacy of and safety of vaccines. His materials include, among other things, a <a href="https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2019/10/11/mainstream-media-flu-shot-propaganda-vs-the-science/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">four-part series</a> on the influenza vaccine and the whoppers we’ve been fed in connection with it. Many other infectious diseases and vaccines are discussed in his articles.</p> <p>To my knowledge, Hammond has not been widely invited to appear on libertarian podcasts, or to give speeches at libertarian events, to discuss his above-referenced article about the scientific/statistical deceit being used as a basis to mandate the MMR vaccine upon children (or to the discuss the other instances cited in his articles of the state’s/Big Pharma’s scientific/statistical deceit in connection with other vaccines mandated upon children). I believe that these have been lost opportunities. Perhaps if more libertarians had taken an interest in this issue and banded together (with other libertarians and vaccine freedom advocates) to tell the state and its corporate cronies that we won’t stand for public policy based upon scientific and statistical deception, the state wouldn’t be using the same scientific/statistical shenanigans on us now with regard to COVID-19—and we wouldn’t be locked down, forced to wear masks and subject to the other “COVID-19 madness” repressive measures that we’re all suffering through.</p> <p><strong>The groundwork for the COVID-19 lockdowns was laid when Americans accepted, within the context of vaccine mandates, that the state is entitled to declare “settled infectious disease science” and they relinquished control from themselves and their doctors to bureaucrats for making medical decisions related to infectious diseases.</strong></p> <p>Within the context of the vaccine mandate debate, the state and its corporate collaborators have repeated the mantra for years, in a concerted fashion, that “the science” is settled in that it’s been scientifically proven that the mandated vaccines are necessary, effective and safe. This is false because the science is <a href="https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/the-jig-is-up/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">not settled</a> regarding any of this. Nonetheless, this mantra has been drilled into the heads of the masses and largely accepted by them.</p> <p>Part of this alleged “settled science” shoved down the masses’ throats has been the concept that <em>natural herd immunity </em>should be rejected as a solution for the infectious diseases faced by mankind in favor of medical intervention through a lifetime series of vaccinations. (<em>Natural herd immunity</em> and the <em>artificial, inferior “herd immunity” from vaccines are separate and distinct</em> and the latter affords the populace less protection, as discussed <a href="https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/natural-vs-artificial-herd-immunity-failed-vaccination-programs-taught-us/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">here</a> and <a href="https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/herd-immunity-a-false-rationale-for-vaccine-mandates/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">here</a>, in articles posted on CHD’s website.)</p> <p>It should be noted that the lockdowns we’ve suffered through during COVID-19 madness have been, in part, based upon the state’s ongoing attempts to interfere with natural herd immunity and to prevent it from occurring.</p> <p>Additionally, in the fight over vaccine mandates, scientific evidence contradicting the state’s/Big Pharma’s “settled science” narrative has been systematically <a href="https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/July-2019/freedom-to-dissent-and-new-blacklist-in-america.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">suppressed</a> by the powers that be.</p> <p>Further, those in the vaccine mandate debate questioning the “settled science” have been widely portrayed as anti-vax crazies by the media, which receives a substantial portion of its funding from Big Pharma. Similarly, we’ve seen derogatory propaganda in the media concerning those questioning the state-sanctioned version of science concerning COVID-19, but, because a COVID-19 vaccine hasn’t arrived on the scene yet, it’s taken the form of the skeptics being labeled as selfish Granny-killers.</p> <p>With regard to mandated vaccines, the state has succeeded in shifting the decision-making role for medical decisions from the individual (along with any medical provider he/she may wish to consult) to bureaucratic administrators. This shift is discussed in my article <em>“</em><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/26/central-planning-of-your-immune-system-is-dangerous/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Central Planning of Your Immune System is Dangerous</em></a><em>” </em>and in this <a href="https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/March-2020/the-national-plan-to-vaccinate-every-american.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">video</a> by Barbara Loe Fisher, President of the <a href="https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/March-2020/the-national-plan-to-vaccinate-every-american.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">National Vaccine Information Center</a>.</p> <p>Americans have overwhelmingly sat idly by while the state deemed itself to be the appropriate declarer of “settled science” in connection with vaccines and they’ve largely acquiesced the right to make medical decisions regarding the vaccination of their children to bureaucrats.</p> <p>This laid a groundwork which was well in place when COVID-19 arrived on the scene, with the following concepts accepted as a “given” by the masses: a body of settled science exists with regard to infectious disease, which is whatever the state, Big Pharma and the media declare it to be; and bureaucrats are entitled to make infectious disease-related medical decisions for us based upon that state-sanctioned settled science.</p> <p>I believe the reason that so few Americans, including libertarians, bothered to oppose vaccine mandates was because they accepted the state’s propaganda that settled science exists which proves that all vaccines mandated by the state are necessary, effective, and safe.</p> <p>In fact, there’s a large body of science which arguably indicates for most, if not all, of the mandated vaccines that they are not necessary or highly effective and that the risks associated with them may be greater than the r Health Care big-pharma CDC COVID-19 FDA vaccines Davis Taylor Maryland Governor Vetoes Bill to Seal Records of Marijuana Possession Charges https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/maryland-governor-vetoes-bill-to-seal-records-of-marijuana-possession-charges/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:423fedaf-fdb7-1386-ec95-77be94a6fbaf Fri, 15 May 2020 17:53:02 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/maryland-governor-vetoes-bill-to-seal-records-of-marijuana-possession-charges/" title="Maryland Governor Vetoes Bill to Seal Records of Marijuana Possession Charges" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />ANNAPOLIS, Md. (May 15, 2020) – Last week, Maryland Gov. Lawrence Hogan vetoed a bill that would have effectively sealed the records of certain marijuana possession charges in the state. Enactment of this bill would have taken another step toward nullifying federal cannabis prohibition in effect. Del. David Moon (D) introduced House Bill 83 (HB83) [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/maryland-governor-vetoes-bill-to-seal-records-of-marijuana-possession-charges/" title="Maryland Governor Vetoes Bill to Seal Records of Marijuana Possession Charges" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/Governor_Hogan-wiki-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><strong>ANNAPOLIS</strong>, Md. (May 15, 2020) – Last week, Maryland Gov. Lawrence Hogan vetoed a bill that would have effectively sealed the records of certain marijuana possession charges in the state. Enactment of this bill would have taken another step toward nullifying federal cannabis prohibition in effect.<span id="more-34677"></span></p> <p>Del. David Moon (D) introduced House Bill 83 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/MD/bill/HB83/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB83</a>) in January. The legislation would prohibit the Maryland JudiciaryCase Search from referring in any way to the existence of a case in which marijuana possession was the only charge if it occurred prior to October 1, 2014. The proposed law would effectively seal those records.</p> <p>The Senate passed HB83 by a 46-0 vote. The House approved the measure 115-16. On May 7, Hogan vetoed HB83.</p> <p>In <a href="https://governor.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Crime-Bills-Veto.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a veto letter</a>, Hogan said he was vetoing the bill because the legislature failed to pass the Violent Firearms Offender Act, along with three other bills to address violent crime. The proposed law Hogan was pushing would have increased the mandatory sentences for illegal possession of a firearm and other gun crimes.</p> <blockquote><p>“While the Senate approved the package by a wide margin, the House failed to act upon it [the Violent Firearms Offenders Act of 2020],” Gov. Hogan wrote. &#8220;Therefore, … I have vetoed … House Bill 83.”</p></blockquote> <p>Because of Hogan&#8217;s political posturing, thousands of Marylanders will continue to struggle with the impacts of having marijuana possession charges on their records.</p> <p>As introduced, HB83 would have automatically expunged marijuana possession convictions, but that provision was amended out in committee. Nevertheless, the enactment of this legislation would have, at least in effect, sealed people’s public records, taking away barriers to employment and housing.</p> <p>The proposed law would not have only helped some people with prior marijuana arrests and convictions on their records get a new start; it will have further undermined federal marijuana prohibition. As marijuana becomes more accepted and more states simply ignore the feds, the federal government is less able to enforce its unconstitutional laws.</p> <p>In the past, we’ve seen some opposition to marijuana legalization bills because the new laws generally leave those previously charged and convicted unprotected. Despite the governor&#8217;s veto, the passage of HB83 demonstrates an important strategic point. Passing bills that take a step forward sets the stage, even if they aren’t perfect. Opening the door clears the way for additional steps. You can’t take the second step before you take the first.</p> <p><b>EFFECT ON FEDERAL PROHIBITION</b></p> <p>Under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) passed in 1970, the federal government maintains complete prohibition of marijuana. Of course, the federal government lacks any constitutional authority to ban or regulate cannabis within the borders of a state, despite the opinion of the politically connected lawyers on the Supreme Court. If you doubt this, ask yourself why it took a constitutional amendment to institute federal alcohol prohibition.</p> <p>When Maryland legalized medical marijuana and decriminalized possession, the state removed a layer of laws prohibiting the possession and use of marijuana, but federal prohibition remains in place. This is significant because FBI statistics show that law enforcement makes approximately 99 of 100 marijuana arrests under state, not federal law. When states stop enforcing marijuana laws, they sweep away most of the basis for 99 percent of marijuana arrests.</p> <p>Furthermore, figures indicate it would take 40 percent of the DEA’s yearly-budget just to investigate and raid all of the dispensaries in Los Angeles – a single city in a single state. That doesn’t include the cost of prosecution. The lesson? The feds lack the resources to enforce marijuana prohibition without state assistance.</p> <p>These new laws further undermine prohibition make it that much more difficult for the federal government to enforce it in Maryland.</p> <p><b>A GROWING MOVEMENT</b></p> <p>Enactment of HB83 would have ignored federal prohibition and continue the process of nullifying it in practice Maryland.</p> <p>Washington, Oregon and Alaska were the first states to legalize recreational cannabis, and California, Nevada, Maine and Massachusetts joined them after ballot initiatives in favor of legalization passed in November 2016. Michigan followed suit when <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/11/michigan-votes-to-legalize-marijuana-nullify-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">voters legalized cannabis for general use</a> in 2018. Vermont <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/01/signed-as-law-vermont-legalizes-recreational-marijuana-foundation-to-nullify-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">became the first state</a> to legalize marijuana through a legislative act in 2018. <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/06/signed-by-the-governor-illinois-legalizes-marijuana-despite-federal-prohibition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Illinois followed suit this year</a>.</p> <p>With 33 states allowing cannabis for medical use, the feds find themselves in a position where they simply can’t enforce prohibition anymore.</p> <p>“The lesson here is pretty straightforward. When enough people say, ‘No!’ to the federal government, and enough states pass laws backing those people up, there’s not much the feds can do to shove their so-called laws, regulations or mandates down our throats,” Tenth Amendment Center founder and executive director Michael Boldin said.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Drug War State Bills cannabis HB83 Marijuana Maryland Mike Maharrey Founding Mothers: Top-5 Quotes from Women of the Revolution https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/founding-mothers-top-5-quotes-from-women-of-the-revolution/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:b7b5ca9a-07e6-9af3-682a-d6e54136d9fc Fri, 15 May 2020 17:12:04 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/founding-mothers-top-5-quotes-from-women-of-the-revolution/" title="Founding Mothers: Top-5 Quotes from Women of the Revolution" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Inspirational. While they&#8217;re often lost down the memory hole, or just plain forgotten and ignored, these &#8220;founding mothers&#8221; have some timeless views we&#8217;d do well to remember today. Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 15, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes &#124; Google Play &#124; Stitcher &#124; Spotify &#124; RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/founding-mothers-top-5-quotes-from-women-of-the-revolution/" title="Founding Mothers: Top-5 Quotes from Women of the Revolution" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520.jpg 1280w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520-980x551.jpg 980w, https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-051520-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Inspirational. While they&#8217;re often lost down the memory hole, or just plain forgotten and ignored, these &#8220;founding mothers&#8221; have some timeless views we&#8217;d do well to remember today.</p> <p>Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 15, 2020<span id="more-34702"></span></p> <p><iframe src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/AqLD-wdaQOY" width="1280" height="720" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/warren-history-of-the-rise-progress-and-termination-of-the-american-revolution-2-vols" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Mercy Otis Warren History of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution (1805)</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.masshist.org/database/viewer.php?item_id=3330" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Hannah Winthrop to Mercy Otis Warren Jan 1, 1774</a></p> <p><a href="https://northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/edenton-tea-party/">Penelope Barker Oct 25 1774</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.masshist.org/digitaladams/archive/doc?id=L17760331aa">Abigail Adams to John Adams -Braintree March 31, 1776</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/634e2390-1576-4008-ad3c-c73f497ed85b" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/3jlfMe3GeJHC/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/1aee395c-1773-41dc-bdff-babefad454d7" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-051520:0" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/621829812" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1OyKAYDVwozKb" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/717372319069634/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CANzzzHHmCA/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on IGTV</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6667102772162371584" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LinkedIn</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Abigail Adams Audio/Video Founding Mothers Hannah Winthrop Mercy Otis Warren Path to Liberty Penelope Barker Quotes Revolution Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 10:55 Inspirational. While they’re often lost down the memory hole, or just plain forgotten and ignored, these “founding mothers” have some timeless views we’d do well to remember today. Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 15, Inspirational. While they’re often lost down the memory hole, or just plain forgotten and ignored, these “founding mothers” have some timeless views we’d do well to remember today. Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 15, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spotify | RSS SHOW LINKS: JOIN TAC Show […] The “Right to Travel” https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/14/the-right-to-travel/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:a23e6021-db62-8a05-c5fb-f99901dd43d5 Thu, 14 May 2020 23:10:30 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/14/the-right-to-travel/" title="The &#8220;Right to Travel&#8221;" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The Constitution was never designed to be a document to cure every human problem. <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/14/the-right-to-travel/" title="The &#8220;Right to Travel&#8221;" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/travel-direction-sign-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>During the COVID-19 epidemic, state and local governments have restricted greatly the freedom of citizens to travel from one place to another. As I have <a href="https://i2i.org/covid-19-and-the-constitution/">pointed out</a>, many of these restrictions violate modern constitutional law.  The Supreme Court characterizes the right to travel as <em>fundamental</em>. That means that even infringements imposed for “compelling governmental purposes” must be “narrowly tailored.” Government COVID restrictions frequently are over-broad or otherwise not adequately targeted at the problem they purport to address.</p> <p>The Supreme Court cases enunciating a right to travel involve movement from state to state. The cases arose when a person moved from State X to State Y and State Y discriminated against him or her in some way. The Court invalidates the discrimination by saying that State Y violated the person’s right to travel.</p> <p>If there is a constitutionally-recognized right to travel among states, then <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/a_fortiori"><em>a fortiori</em></a> it includes a right to travel within one’s own state. After all, you can’t get to another state without moving first within your own. Moreover, moving locally seems to be an even more basic right than moving elsewhere. Not surprisingly, in 2002 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit <a href="https://i2i.org/wp-content/uploads/Johnson-v.-Cincinnati-travel.pdf">ruled that</a> the right to travel includes in-state movement.</p> <p>Most people would recognize “freedom of locomotion” as an inherent, natural right of free people. But, of course, not every natural right is given specific protection by the Constitution. There is no specifically constitutional right to eat Chinese food or wear the hat of one’s choice. Nor does the Constitution mention a right to travel. So is it a <em>constitutional</em> as well as a <em>natural</em> right? I think the honest answer is “no.”</p> <p>The Constitution was never designed to be a document to cure every human problem. But many writers seem to think it has to be, and they have struggled to find the right to travel among its provisions.</p> <p>For example, some claim the right derives from the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/privileges_and_immunities_clause">Privileges and Immunities Clause</a> of Article IV. That provision bans certain kinds of discrimination by states against outsiders. It does not apply to the federal government.</p> <p>However, <a href="https://i2i.org/wp-content/uploads/PI-article-ocr.pdf">copious evidence</a>—which commentators have largely ignored—tells us that when the Constitution was adopted, the terms “privileges” and “immunities” did not refer to natural rights such as freedom of locomotion. Rather, they were technical legal terms that represented alternative ways of referring to <em>entitlements </em>created by civil government. Notable privileges and immunities included formal procedures for transferring property, access to state courts, trial by jury, and the writ of habeas corpus (which the Constitution specifically calls a “privilege”). The Constitution’s Privileges or Immunities Clause focused on entitlements rather than natural rights.</p> <p>Commentators frequently cite a statement by a single Supreme Court justice suggesting that the Privileges and Immunities Clause did include natural rights. But that statement was not relevant to the issues in the case under decision, and it was not issued by the full court. And the case in which it appeared, <em>Corfield v. Coryell</em> (1823), was decided more than three decades <em>after</em> the Constitution was ratified. Moreover, if you read the statement thoughtfully, you see that it is <a href="https://i2i.org/wp-content/uploads/PI-article-ocr.pdf">so obviously inaccurate</a> you can’t rely on it without abandoning your critical faculties.</p> <p>There is also this important fact: The Articles of Confederation included a right to travel immediately after its privileges and immunities clause. But <em>the framers of the Constitution removed it!</em> Here is the language of the Articles:</p> <p>“The . . . the free inhabitants of each of these States . . . shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States; and the people of each State shall have free ingress and regress to and from any other State and shall enjoy therein all the privileges of trade and commerce, subject to the same duties, impositions, and restrictions as the inhabitants thereof respectively . . .”</p> <p>Here is the language in the Constitution:</p> <p>“The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”</p> <p>An obvious reason the Constitution’s framers dropped the right to travel was that the Constitution, unlike the Articles, granted Congress authority over interstate trade. The Federal Congress would be able to eliminate state barriers to free movement in ways the Confederation Congress could not.</p> <p>Can a right to travel be found in other parts of the Constitution? Some commentators cite the Due Process Clause of the 5th amendment (which applies to the federal government) and the Due Process Cause of the 14th amendment (which applies to the states).</p> <p>The phrase “due process of law” was a 1354 re-formulation of the “law of the land” clause in Magna Carta (1215). Its sole purpose was to stop arbitrary government legal proceedings. Despite the Supreme Court’s lame efforts to read substantive rights into “due process,” historically the phrase means only this: When the government proceeds against you criminally or civilly it must follow established procedures and not make up the rules as it goes along. In other words, the due process clauses are really just <a href="https://i2i.org/wp-content/uploads/Statutory-Retroactivity-The-Founders-View.pdf">protections against unfair government retroactivity.</a></p> <p>Another possible source of the right to travel is the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equal_protection">Equal Protection Clause</a> of the 14th amendment. This is better grounded: The “State X/StateY” hypothetical case above really is an Equal Protection Clause case. It makes sense to apply the Equal Protection Clause to prevent states from discriminating senselessly against their newer citizens. But granting such protection is not the same as creating a self-contained “right to travel.” It also does nothing to protect the right against the federal government.</p> <p>Finally, there are those who argue that travel is a “privilege or immunity” of “citizens of the United States,” thereby protected by the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourteenth_amendment_0">Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th amendment</a>.</p> <p>Constitutional commentators of all political stripes love the idea of using the Privileges or Immunities Clause to prevent the states from treading on favorite constitutional rights. (Many libertarians support the concept, oblivious to the fact that the more broadly you read the Privileges or Immunities Clause the more powerful Congress becomes, because of the enforcement rule in Section 5 of the 14th amendment.)</p> <p>Those commentators have struggled mightily to show that the Privileges or Immunities Clause protects natural rights. They loathe the 1873 <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/83/36/#tab-opinion-1967657">Supreme Court opinion</a>, subscribed to by justices with personal knowledge of the framing and ratification of the 14th amendment, that interpreted the Clause more narrowly.</p> <p>The flood of words purporting to prove that “privileges or immunities” includes “natural rights” masks the weaknesses of the case. You don’t have to navigate far into that flood to spy some of those weaknesses: One commentator says “privileges or immunities” comprise only the content of the Bill of Rights. Another says they include unenumerated rights. For one commentator “the privileges or immunities of citizens” include property rights. For another, they include abortion. For yet another, they encompass both—or neither.  Additionally, the commentators produce little evidence about the views of the ultimate authorities: the ratifying state legislatures. Instead they discuss what one or two members of Congress said, or a remark made years after the amendment was ratified, or the gibberish from <em>Corfield v. Coryell</em>.</p> <p>Now, as we have seen, in the original Constitution the terms “privileges” and “immunities” mean entitlements. Without strong evidence to the contrary, it makes sense to apply the same meaning in the 14th amendment because:</p> <ul> <li>When the same word (and here, almost the same phrase) appears several times in a document, it is presumed to mean the same thing,</li> <li>the state legislatures that ratified the 14th amendment were familiar with that presumption, and</li> <li>that interpretation serves what everyone admits was the core purpose of the 14th amendment: to protect entitlements created by federal law—such as equal access to public institutions and accommodations—against state interference.</li> </ul> <p>Now, let me be clear: I would love for there to be a constitutional right to travel. But honesty compels me to admit that the one the courts apply is probably a judicial fiction.</p> <p>The <a href="https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-original-constitution-robert-natelson/1026762475">Constitution does not always agree with me.</a> Nor are my personal preferences always constitutional law.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> 14th Amendment Constitution Privileges and Immunities Clause Corfield v Coryell Privileges and Immunities Right to Travel Rob Natelson Three Reminders from The Bill of Rights https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/three-reminders-from-the-bill-of-rights/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:cbc18fe2-c0b6-7efe-8e3c-8003ac65ff77 Thu, 14 May 2020 16:37:26 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/three-reminders-from-the-bill-of-rights/" title="Three Reminders from The Bill of Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />As a condition for accepting the Constitution, the American people demanded the enactment of the Bill of Rights immediately after ratification of the Constitution. They had been assured that the Constitution was calling into existence a national government whose powers were limited to those enumerated in the Constitution. But that did not satisfy them. They [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/three-reminders-from-the-bill-of-rights/" title="Three Reminders from The Bill of Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/10/bill-of-rights-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p class="p1"><span class="s1">As a condition for accepting the Constitution, the American people demanded the enactment of the Bill of Rights immediately after ratification of the Constitution. </span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">They had been assured that the Constitution was calling into existence a national government whose powers were limited to those enumerated in the Constitution. But that did not satisfy them. They wanted a Bill of Rights to make it clear that the federal government was prohibited from doing the things that are listed in the Bill of Rights. There are several important things to notice about the Bill of Rights:</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">First, the Bill of Rights, does not give people rights. Our ancestors understood that rights come from nature and God, not from government. People’s rights preexist government.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Second, the Bill of Rights consists of prohibitions and restrictions on the federal government. Why is that important? Because our ancestors knew that the federal power would inevitably attract people to public office who would do the types of things that were being restricted. They would criminalize speech, especially speech that was critical of federal officials. They would ban protests against government. They would force people to subscribe to a certain religion. They would seize people’s guns. They would punish any malefactor by simply having civil or military agents take people into custody, incarcerate them, torture them, or execute them, all without trial by jury and due process of law. The Bill of Rights was to serve as a reminder that federal officials had no legitimate power to do any of these things.</span></p> <p class="p1"><span class="s1">Third, the Bill of Rights contains no emergency or crisis exception. That’s because our ancestors knew that historically crises and emergencies were the time-honored way by which people lost their liberties at the hands of their own government. During such times, people become afraid and their natural tendency is to look to the government to keep them safe and secure. They forget that the biggest threat to their liberty is their very own government, as reflected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Thus, they eagerly trade away their liberty for “security.” Later, when the crisis or emergency has passed, they discover that the government is unwilling to give up the power it has acquired over them.</span></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Bill of Rights Jacob Hornberger Surveillance Spam in Utah https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/surveillance-spam-in-utah/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:8e718f07-ded9-2b1d-bf8f-c2c58325e915 Thu, 14 May 2020 11:27:54 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/surveillance-spam-in-utah/" title="Surveillance Spam in Utah" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="629" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-768x403.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-1024x537.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-1080x566.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Utah&#8217;s attempt to use geofencing and electronic checkpoints to track people coming into the state during the coronavirus pandemic was an abject failure. As the coronavirus pandemic gripped the U.S., Utah Gov. Gary Herbert issued an executive order that required every adult crossing the Utah border to submit an electronic &#8220;Travel Self-Declaration Form,&#8221; including detailed [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/surveillance-spam-in-utah/" title="Surveillance Spam in Utah" rel="nofollow"><img width="1200" height="629" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200.jpg 1200w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-300x157.jpg 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-768x403.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-1024x537.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-1080x566.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1200px) 100vw, 1200px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2018/12/utah-1200-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Utah&#8217;s attempt to use <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/05/27/geofence-warrants-a-high-tech-repeat-from-the-revolution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">geofencing</a> and electronic checkpoints to track people coming into the state during the coronavirus pandemic was an abject failure. <span id="more-34649"></span></p> <p>As the coronavirus pandemic gripped the U.S., Utah Gov. Gary Herbert issued an executive order that required every adult crossing the Utah border to submit an electronic &#8220;Travel Self-Declaration Form,&#8221; including detailed contact information along with data about their health status. As vehicles crossed into the state, the state&#8217;s emergency alert system sent a text to all of the cell phones in the vehicle directing the occupants to fill out the declaration form.</p> <p>The people-tracking scheme didn&#8217;t work and the state was forced to abandon it within about 72 hours. The system couldn&#8217;t differentiate between a cell phone inside a car entering the state and a cell phone sitting in somebody&#8217;s house near the border. As a result. some area residents living dozens of miles from the border had to endure repeated alerts. A lady living in Myton, Utah, <a href="https://www.deseret.com/utah/2020/4/13/21219282/utah-division-emergency-management-suspends-border-text-alert-program-coronavirus-problems" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">told <em>Deseret News</em> she received 80 text messages</a> in a single morning. Myton is about 60 miles from the Colorado border. The system also failed to distinguish between vehicles entering and leaving the state.</p> <p><a href="https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/utahs-shiny-surveillance-technology-to-address-covid-19-fails-miserably/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">According to the ALCU</a>, &#8220;The government made several attempts to narrow the wireless zones, but failed to stop the wayward text messages going to people located miles from the state border.&#8221;</p> <p>This reveals a problem with many surveillance technologies. They operate with a huge margin of error. For instance, privacy advocates have raised significant concerns about the accuracy of facial recognition technology, particularly when reading the facial features of minority populations. During a test run by the ACLU of Northern California, <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ne8wa8/amazons-facial-recognition-misidentified-1-in-5-california-lawmakers-as-criminals" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">facial recognition misidentified 26 members of the California legislature</a> as people in a database of arrest photos.</p> <p>The inaccuracies inherent in surveillance technologies become more concerning when you realize this spy gear can be used to send armed government agents after you.</p> <p>Utah authorities emphasized that filling out the declaration forms was on the &#8220;honor system,&#8221; but at the time, they called the rollout &#8220;Phase 1,&#8221; leaving the door open for future enforcement. In fact, you can always count on surveillance programs to expand and become more intrusive over time.</p> <p>Even more concerning is the fact that the state shut down program due to complaints about &#8220;surveillance spam&#8221; and technical failures, not because people were angry about this appalling example of government overreach and its violation of basic privacy rights. As the ACLU put it, &#8220;The problem wasn’t that Utahns were concerned about the government wanting to know personal details about thousands of people entering the state.</p> <blockquote><p>&#8220;The problem wasn’t the state’s threat that it could “take subsequent steps” if travelers entering the state did not comply with the order. Nor was the problem that many people in Utah’s immigrant community correctly feared implementation of this new surveillance system given the state’s troubled history with the <a href="https://www.deseret.com/2019/7/11/8936201/what-access-do-ice-federal-agencies-have-to-utahns-driver-s-license-information" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">secret sharing of personal data with outside law enforcement agencies</a>, as well as <a href="https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=53879423&amp;itype=CMSID" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">data breaches of sensitive information held by the Department of Health</a>. The state of Utah’s failed experiment with this technology and short-lived plan to infringe on people’s privacy should serve as a lesson for government leaders nationwide. It should also serve as a lesson for all of us to scrutinize government actions — even in times of crisis — more closely.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>Crises always serve as a pretext for government expansion. As Micheal Boldin said in <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/national-health-surveillance-system-on-the-way/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">an episode of <em>Path to Liberty</em></a>, &#8220;In times of crisis and fear, you&#8217;ll almost always find people who support the monster state calling for more power &#8211; more government power &#8211; more centralized power as a solution to basically anything and everything. And one of the first things we always see them go to is more surveillance. Warrantless mass surveillance is something that gets pushed through in these types of times over and over again.&#8221;</p> <p>We should resist it. Not just because we might end up with surveillance spam on our phone. And not just because this stuff doesn&#8217;t always work as advertised. We should resist it because it is a dangerous expansion of government power that will undermine our liberty with 100 percent certainty.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Surveillance geofencing Privacy surveillance Utah Mike Maharrey Staggering April Budget Deficit Just the Beginning https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/staggering-april-budget-deficit-just-the-beginning/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:f098af17-deca-c53f-3b0f-ba7839845ea0 Wed, 13 May 2020 20:15:08 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/staggering-april-budget-deficit-just-the-beginning/" title="Staggering April Budget Deficit Just the Beginning" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The April federal budget deficit came in at a staggering $738 billion as government coronavirus stimulus began flowing through the pipelines and revenue dipped due to the government lockdowns. Analysts expected a massive deficit in April, but it&#8217;s still a staggering number. To put it into perspective, the previous record for a single month was [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/staggering-april-budget-deficit-just-the-beginning/" title="Staggering April Budget Deficit Just the Beginning" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/shutterstock_170676266-railroad-cliff-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>The <a href="https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts0420.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">April federal budget deficit</a> came in at a staggering $738 billion as government coronavirus stimulus began flowing through the pipelines and revenue dipped due to the government lockdowns. <span id="more-34693"></span></p> <p>Analysts expected a massive deficit in April, but it&#8217;s still a staggering number. To put it into perspective, the previous record for a single month was $235 billion and that was just in February of this year.</p> <p>Including April&#8217;s shortfall, the budget deficit for fiscal 2020 stands just under $1.5 trillion with five months to go.</p> <p>The highest deficit on record was $1.413 trillion in 2009. In fact, the federal government has only run deficits over $1 trillion in four fiscal years, all during the Great Recession. The fifth trillion-dollar deficit was coming down the pike in fiscal 2020, despite what Trump kept calling “<a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/08/01/smoke-and-mirrors-the-greatest-economy-is-built-on-spending-and-debt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the greatest economy in the history of America</a>.”</p> <p>Simply put, the Trump administration was already running significant budget deficits even before the coronavirus crisis and debt was piling up at a dizzying pace. The deficit already featured numbers you would expect to see during a massive economic slowdown. Response to the pandemic has put spending and debt in hyperdrive. The <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/12/that-didnt-take-long-u-s-national-debt-exceeds-24-trillion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">national debt eclipsed $24 trillion</a> just last month. Twenty-eight days later, <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/1-trillion-added-to-national-debt-in-less-than-one-month/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">it pushed past $25 trillion</a>.</p> <p>The U.S. Treasury Department announced plans to borrow $2.99 trillion in the second quarter. The Treasury also plans to borrow another $677 billion in the July-September quarter, bringing the total fiscal 2020 budget deficit to a projected $4.48 trillion. Given those numbers, the national debt will end fiscal 2020 over $28 trillion.</p> <p><a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-debt/trump-says-will-address-national-debt-if-re-elected-interview-idUSKBN22D639" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">President Trump said he plans to address the national debt</a> if reelected. He didn’t present any kind of plan, but he did say that the growing debt “bothers” him.  It appears the plan is just to kick the can down the road by issuing longer-term Treasuries at zero percent interest.</p> <p>“We’re putting in, we’re replacing debt with really long term good debt, zero, you know, which is a beautiful thing,” Trump said in a radio interview.</p> <p>But who the heck is going to buy long-term bonds with no yield?</p> <p>And refinancing doesn’t address the underlying issue. Uncle Sam has a spending problem. And the truth he had a spending problem long before the pandemic. That previous budget deficit record last February came before the economic lockdown for COVID-19.</p> <p>The Trump administration spent $980 billion in April alone, a 161 percent increase. That pushed total spending for the fiscal year to $3.33 trillion.</p> <p>The federal government has already committed to roughly $3 trillion in stimulus and more is certainly coming down the pike. The Democrats in the House recently proposed another $3 trillion spending bill.</p> <p>The revenue side of the equation looks equally gloomy. Receipts for the month came in at $242 billion, down about 55 percent year-on-year. According to a Treasury Department official <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-budget/u-s-posts-record-738-billion-budget-deficit-in-april-idUSKBN22O2SG" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">cited by <em>Reuters</em></a>, $600 billion in outlays for April were attributable to government spending on coronavirus relief measures. Government receipts fell by about $300 billion due to the economic lockdown.</p> <p>The trillion-dollar question is who&#8217;s going to pay for all of this.</p> <p>The answer is simple: we are!</p> <p>We will either see higher taxes or the government will try to inflate the debt away by printing money and further devaluing your purchasing power.</p> <p>I&#8217;d expect both.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Economics Federal Funding budget deficit Economy government spending National Debt Mike Maharrey Stalker State: Patriot Act, Trace Act, and More Surveillance https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/stalker-state-patriot-act-trace-act-and-more-surveillance/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:1785fe3c-9762-0418-7ff1-26c32114380f Wed, 13 May 2020 18:33:55 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/stalker-state-patriot-act-trace-act-and-more-surveillance/" title="Stalker State: Patriot Act, Trace Act, and More Surveillance" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051320.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051320.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051320-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051320-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051320-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Emergencies create the perfect excuse for government power to expand. Once established, these government powers never go away. On this episode, we&#8217;ll be talking about the Patriot Act, TRACE Act, Cellphone tracking, geofencing and more. Path to Liberty: May 13, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes &#124; Google Play &#124; Stitcher &#124; Spotify &#124; RSS SHOW [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/stalker-state-patriot-act-trace-act-and-more-surveillance/" title="Stalker State: Patriot Act, Trace Act, and More Surveillance" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051320.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051320.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051320-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051320-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051320-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Emergencies create the perfect excuse for government power to expand. Once established, these government powers never go away. On this episode, we&#8217;ll be talking about the Patriot Act, TRACE Act, Cellphone tracking, geofencing and more.</p> <p>Path to Liberty: May 13, 2020<span id="more-34694"></span></p> <p><iframe width="1280" height="720" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/xtLe50CSXZc?start=62" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/yes-section-215-expired-now-what" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Yes, Section 215 Expired. Now What?</a><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/yes-section-215-expired-now-what" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Yes, Section 215 Expired. Now What?</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2001/11/let-sun-set-patriot#s215" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">What PATRIOT 215 Does</a><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2001/11/let-sun-set-patriot#s215" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">What PATRIOT 215 Does</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/11/patriot-act-on-steroids-surveillance-state-beyond-section-215/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Patriot Act on Steroids: Surveillance State Beyond Section 215</a><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/11/patriot-act-on-steroids-surveillance-state-beyond-section-215/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Patriot Act on Steroids: Surveillance State Beyond Section 215</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/us/politics/house-fisa-bill.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">House Departs Without Vote to Extend Expired F.B.I. Spy Tools</a><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/us/politics/house-fisa-bill.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">House Departs Without Vote to Extend Expired F.B.I. Spy Tools</a></p> <p><a href="https://reason.com/2020/05/12/sen-mitch-mcconnell-looks-to-undermine-efforts-to-protect-americans-from-secret-fbi-surveillance/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Sen. Mitch McConnell Looks To Undermine Efforts to Protect Americans From Secret FBI Surveillance</a><a href="https://reason.com/2020/05/12/sen-mitch-mcconnell-looks-to-undermine-efforts-to-protect-americans-from-secret-fbi-surveillance/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Sen. Mitch McConnell Looks To Undermine Efforts to Protect Americans From Secret FBI Surveillance</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6560?s=1&#038;r=35" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Undertaking National Initiatives to Tackle Epidemic Act of 2020 or the UNITE Act of 2020</a><a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6560?s=1&#038;r=35" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Undertaking National Initiatives to Tackle Epidemic Act of 2020 or the UNITE Act of 2020</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr6666/summary" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">H.R. 6666: COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act</a><a href="https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr6666/summary" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">H.R. 6666: COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hr6666-remove-covid-patients-homes/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Does H.R. 6666 Authorize Removing COVID-19 Patients from Their Homes?</a><a href="https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hr6666-remove-covid-patients-homes/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Does H.R. 6666 Authorize Removing COVID-19 Patients from Their Homes?</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-economic-adviser-kevin-hassett-there-is-no-downside-implementing-a-national-coronavirus-tracing-system/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Trump Economic Adviser Kevin Hassett: ‘There Is No Downside’ Implementing a National Coronavirus Tracing System</a><a href="https://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-economic-adviser-kevin-hassett-there-is-no-downside-implementing-a-national-coronavirus-tracing-system/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Trump Economic Adviser Kevin Hassett: ‘There Is No Downside’ Implementing a National Coronavirus Tracing System</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-is-just-the-latest-excuse-to-expand-the-surveillance-state/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Coronavirus is Just the Latest Excuse to Expand the Surveillance State</a><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-is-just-the-latest-excuse-to-expand-the-surveillance-state/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Coronavirus is Just the Latest Excuse to Expand the Surveillance State</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/6f5dddd6-ab25-41ba-aa2f-140391ee35eb" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/vFfwbdDDPkPA/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/2b43d5b9-666b-4e2e-a655-f925b0b2e24c" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-051320:c" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/619843741" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1lPKqVmqRWbGb" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/262893728324236/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><a href="https://dlive.tv/p/dlive-05196520+hbfV4dRMg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on DLive</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Current Events Path to Liberty Surveillance Contact Tracing Coronavirus FISA Location Tracking Mitch McConnell Patriot Act Section 215 surveillance TRACE Act UNITE Act Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 37:54 Emergencies create the perfect excuse for government power to expand. Once established, these government powers never go away. On this episode, we’ll be talking about the Patriot Act, TRACE Act, Cellphone tracking, geofencing and more. Emergencies create the perfect excuse for government power to expand. Once established, these government powers never go away. On this episode, we’ll be talking about the Patriot Act, TRACE Act, Cellphone tracking, geofencing and more. Path to Liberty: May 13, 2020 PODCAST VERSION Subscribe: iTunes | Google Play | Stitcher | Spotify | RSS SHOW […] Living in the Wikileaks Era https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/living-in-the-wikileaks-era/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:3c633570-dc76-72a7-75fd-d807c6407b8c Wed, 13 May 2020 11:27:54 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/living-in-the-wikileaks-era/" title="Living in the Wikileaks Era" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The Century of the Great State is behind us. I plot that century from the 1917 Russian Revolution that ultimately empowered a state-level actor to be the messenger of the toxic ideology of Marxism, through to the death of the internationally popular dictator Fidel Castro in 2016. It was a century when more than 100 [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/living-in-the-wikileaks-era/" title="Living in the Wikileaks Era" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/wikileaks-sticker-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>The Century of the Great State is behind us. I plot that century from the 1917 Russian Revolution that ultimately empowered a state-level actor to be the messenger of the toxic ideology of Marxism, through to the death of the internationally popular dictator Fidel Castro in 2016.<span id="more-34632"></span></p> <p>It was a century when more than 100 million died at the hands of their own governments as those governments claimed to be doing good for their citizenry.</p> <p>That is the past. What an ugly past it was. It can be put behind us if we so wish.</p> <p>And now we have a special gift. It is a gift called the present.</p> <p>And a new era may be ahead of us.</p> <p>There are <a href="https://mises.org/wire/covid-19-experts-have-no-crystal-ball" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a lot of experts who claim to be able to know the future</a>. I can’t predict the future. I have no crystal ball. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying. What I do see though is our present.</p> <p>In our present, the &#8220;great state&#8221; has been rendered obsolete in several key ways and is growing in obsolescence daily. The signs are all around us.</p> <p>The Tea Party, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump were all seen as coups on the status quo, by a portion of the electorate. They were all born of movements intended to upend a government that people no longer trusted.</p> <p>The so-called &#8220;Fourth Estate&#8221; &#8211; the mainstream media &#8211; had, in effect, become a propaganda arm of the government. But the internet displaced the Fourth Estate as the sole arbiter of truth. This notably reached a turning point in 1997, when a nobody from nowhere, Matt Drudge, found out that <em>Newsweek</em> editors had spiked a story about President Clinton and a White House intern. Thanks to Drudge, that story commanded the front-pages instead of being buried.</p> <p>In 2007 and 2008, as the economy was in meltdown, Ron Paul was speaking about monetary policy to packed rooms and receptive internet audiences.</p> <p>A cypherpunk was paying attention. Instead of being the pigeonholed specialist that our overly academic era demands, he crossed boundaries and cross-pollinated theories between two important disciplines to solve problems that were global in scale. Satoshi Nakamoto identified Austrian School economic theories that pointed to the value of hard money and identified research in informatics that pointed to the value of encryption.</p> <p>He combined the two concepts (and more) in the <a href="https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bitcoin whitepaper</a> and created a genie that will never again be bottled up. He invented the technology for a competing currency that governments can never censor.</p> <p>Cryptocurrency didn’t change the world overnight. That’s not how change usually happens. But it may foretell a future where an oft-abused central bank &#8211; much like the one that Karl Marx, the enabler of dictators, called for in his 1848 Communist Manifesto &#8211; would be rendered incapable of working its mischief.</p> <p>This technology presents a formidable challenge to a relic of the great state, the Federal Reserve Bank, the third central bank of the United States, created in 1913, that has helped grow the promising beacon of freedom that America was into the parasitic tyrant state that it is today: on its people and on the world.</p> <p>Today a man is in prison who has helped to further free humanity, using the tools at his disposal and his resources in life. He is one of many like him in prisons, exiles, and lockdowns. Julian Assange is a hero in this young era in which we find ourselves, a key player in the period of transition, a symbol of what can be, a portent of how the future could look.</p> <p>There are untold others like him. And every day there are more: perhaps learning <a href="https://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-python" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">python</a>, or even just learning to run a script.</p> <p>Until May 6, 1954, the four-minute mile was seen as an impossibility, something beyond human capacity. Then Roger Bannister ran a four-minute mile at Oxford’s Iffley Road Track. Suddenly others started running four-minute miles, thousands to date. Now it is seen as a perfectly normal thing for a highly trained mile runner to be able to do.</p> <p>The mold had been broken.</p> <p>The constraints were not physical. They were psychological.</p> <p>Assange too broke a mold. He struck a blow to the deep state. He sent thousands cowering, afraid that their mischief would see the light of day. He did this as a one-man team who inspired others to collaborate. Suddenly small-time hackers knew that a vast realm of potential was out there that had never been explored.</p> <p>And in the fallout they chased him. They cornered him in an embassy. They turned him into a martyr and an exemplar. They caged him. And they drove him to the edge of sanity, where he now remains according to reports. Is that really the worst you can do? Is that really the worst? Is anyone supposed to be scared because of how you’ve treated the man who has outfoxed you at nearly every turn and put on full display what an incompetent laughingstock the tyrant is?</p> <p>There are millions who would willingly accept that fate for the chance of having exposed the tyrant for what he is.</p> <p>The governmental response to coronavirus has brought untold death and destruction to human society. A level of corona communism has been implemented that far exceeds anything that humanity has ever known. Every totalitarian has spent these weeks licking their chops at the amount of harm they can do to unsuspecting people if they just continue to parrot the line that every invasion of all they hold dear is being done for their own good.</p> <p>There are many ways to <a href="https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/04/allan-stevo/the-resistance-has-begun-24-examples-of-americans-resisting/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fight the totalitarian</a>. There are some <a href="https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/04/allan-stevo/14-ways-to-be-civilly-disobedient-in-the-face-of-the-corona-ban/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">classic ways</a> and there are some new ways. In late April 2020, a month into the lockdowns, the world was <a href="https://www.zerohedge.com/health/email-addresses-and-passwords-who-nih-wuhan-lab-and-gates-foundation-dumped-4chan" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">treated to a reminder</a> of how some of the new ways look.</p> <blockquote><p>“A cache of nearly 25,000 email addresses and passwords allegedly belonging to the World Health Organization (WHO), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Wuhan Institute of Virology, Bill Gates Foundation and several other groups involved with the coronavirus pandemic response were dumped on 4chan before appearing on several other websites, according to the SITE Intelligence Group.”</p></blockquote> <p>Suddenly, 25,000 accounts that had been hidden from public scrutiny, but had a significant impact on the public, were made available in the internet’s own Freedom of Information Act.</p> <p>Going forward, the tyrant may not want the creator of the most malware-prone software on earth to run its secret vaccine program.</p> <p>Tyrants want secrecy for themselves, full disclosure for everyone else. The natural order wants privacy for us, full disclosure for those we empower. I don’t know how this inversion of nature that we are now living through will turn out; I have no crystal ball. But I know how it always has turned out: Not well for the tyrant.</p> <p>Some technology is so simple to crack, that the data could very well have been accessed by a 12-year-old. There are limits to what can be identified by this particular hack and data release, but it is a potent reminder of how much power to derail the tyrant exists and in how many hands.</p> <p>The embarrassing <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/john-podesta-wikileaks-hacked-emails-229304" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">2016 Wikileaks data dumps</a> are a reminder of how unsophisticated the many-headed tyrant really is.</p> <p>Akin to the concept behind the filibuster, the veto, or unanimous juries, the current state of technology allows an individual with a strong conscientious objection to throw a wrench into government plans. The wisdom of the ages has always told us that it is not government inaction that leads to a mess. The people can handle themselves just fine. It is government action that leads to a mess.</p> <p>I don’t know what the future looks like, but I know what the present looks like.</p> <p>With the technological breakthrough that is the Bitcoin white paper, the central banks have had competing currencies forced upon them &#8211; in time the tyrant will have diminished ability to finance his ways.</p> <p>Using the Internet, everyone now has access to a virtual printing press with a global distribution network &#8211; the tyrant can no longer control the flow of information.</p> <p>Encryption has brought privacy of all means back into the hands of all who want it &#8211; the tyrant will have no way to monitor his subjects.</p> <p>Wikileaks-style hacks have enabled anyone across the planet to be a history-altering investigative journalist &#8211; the tyrant will have nowhere to hide.</p> <p>We live in the Wikileaks era.</p> <p>For those who love human freedom, there is no greater time to be alive.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Liberty Bitcoin Decentralization Wikileaks Allan Stevo Coronavirus is Just the Latest Excuse to Expand the Surveillance State https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-is-just-the-latest-excuse-to-expand-the-surveillance-state/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:a1502fa9-83b5-f657-5401-1340fea85347 Wed, 13 May 2020 09:42:37 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-is-just-the-latest-excuse-to-expand-the-surveillance-state/" title="Coronavirus is Just the Latest Excuse to Expand the Surveillance State" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Federal, state and local agencies have teamed up to operate a warrantless cellphone tracking program to monitor compliance with COVID-19 social distancing requirements. According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, the program provides information on people&#8217;s movements in over 500 U.S. cities. According to the report, the CDC spearheads the program known as [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-is-just-the-latest-excuse-to-expand-the-surveillance-state/" title="Coronavirus is Just the Latest Excuse to Expand the Surveillance State" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bigstock-Observation-2654717-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Federal, state and local agencies have teamed up to operate a warrantless cellphone tracking program to monitor compliance with COVID-19 social distancing requirements.</p> <p>According to <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/government-tracking-how-people-move-around-in-coronavirus-pandemic-11585393202?mod=searchresults&amp;page=1&amp;pos=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a report by the <em>Wall Street Journal</em></a>, the program provides information on people&#8217;s movements in over 500 U.S. cities. According to the report, the CDC spearheads the program known as the COVID-19 Mobility Data Network with assistance from state and local governments. Tech companies and data providers have reportedly been cooperating with the effort.</p> <p>This information has been fed to law enforcement agencies. For instance, according to a report from the <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8164301/Government-tracking-Americans-cell-phones-spread-coronavirus.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Daily Mail</em></a>, &#8220;one source shared that researchers learned that a huge number of New Yorkers had been visiting Brooklyn&#8217;s Prospect Part and handed the information over to authorities.&#8221;</p> <p>Emergencies create the perfect excuse for government power to expand.</p> <p>The COVID-19 pandemic is no exception. The spread of coronavirus and the fear generated has opened the door to all kinds of government actions that would be intolerable in normal times. Once established, these government powers never go away. In fact, the 9/11 emergency allowed the federal government to create the foundation for the surveillance state that exists today with the passage of the Patriot Act and other post-9/11 &#8220;authorities.&#8221;</p> <p>Since then, the federal government has been constructing an integrated national surveillance state with the cooperation of state and local agencies. The COVID-19 &#8220;emergency&#8221; provides an excuse to put that system to &#8220;good use.&#8221; it also sets the stage for further expansion and abuse of the system in the future.</p> <p>Some have pushed back against further expansion of the surveillance state during the pandemic, recognizing the inherent danger of letting that particular cat out of the bag. The New York-based Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP) <a href="https://www.stopspying.org/latest-news/2020/3/28/stop-condemns-federal-state-warrantless-cellphone-tracking-program-for-covid-19-social-distancing" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">released a statement</a> opposing the expanded use of location data to track coronavirus.</p> <blockquote><p>“Even as we battle this unprecedented public health threat, we still have to uphold the Constitution. Warrantless cellphone location tracking has been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, and this surveillance program poses dire consequences for Americans’ privacy. We are deeply concerned that this data was not only collected in secret, but that it’s apparently being shared with no protections against being used by police or even ICE. While it’s unclear if this sort of surveillance state helps prevent the spread of COVID-19, it’s quite clear that it undermines our most fundamental rights and risks driving countless Americans into the shadows.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>The COVID-19 tracking program reportedly strips records shared with government agencies of identifying information. But as <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/how-protect-privacy-when-aggregating-location-data-fight-covid-19" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a report by the Electronic Frontier Foundation</a> (EFF) points out, it&#8217;s virtually impossible to truly anonymize location data.</p> <blockquote><p>Practically speaking, there is no way to deidentify individual location data. Information about where a person is and has been itself is usually enough to reidentify them. Someone who travels frequently between a given office building and a single-family home is probably unique in those habits and therefore identifiable from other readily identifiable sources. One <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01376" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">widely cited study from 2013</a> even found that researchers could uniquely characterize 50 percent of people using only two <i>randomly</i> chosen time and location data points.</p></blockquote> <p>It is possible to aggregate data in a way that protects individual identities, but once the pandora&#8217;s box is open, how do you keep everything inside? By its nature, government pushes the boundaries. It&#8217;s only a matter of time before police agencies are using this information to identify individuals.</p> <p>Other countries have already used location data to identify specific people. China was particularly aggressive in using mass surveillance of phones to classify individuals based on their health status and to then restrict their movements. Those who claim &#8220;that can&#8217;t happen here&#8221; are naive. In fact, police have already used<a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/05/27/geofence-warrants-a-high-tech-repeat-from-the-revolution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> mass location tracking to hunt down fugitives</a>.</p> <p>Judges across the U.S. are issuing search warrants that effectively authorize police to search broad geographical areas to determine who was near a given place at a given time. In practice, these warrants give police permission to use Google location data to engage in massive fishing expeditions and subject hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people to police location tracking.</p> <p>In practice, “geofence” warrants authorize police to search Google’s massive location tracking database for all of the phones within a given geographical area during a specific timeframe. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/13/us/google-location-tracking-police.html">According to the <em>New York Times</em></a>, federal agents first utilized the practice in 2016.</p> <p>According to the <em>Times</em>, these broadly construed warrants help police pinpoint possible suspects and witnesses in the absence of other clues. Google employees said the company often responds to a single warrant with location information on dozens or hundreds of devices.</p> <p>North Carolina produced the first public reports of this investigative tactic last year after detectives obtained warrants to obtain location data for all the phones that were in the area of two shootings. <a href="https://www.wral.com/Raleigh-police-search-google-location-history/17377435/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">According to WRAL</a>, “On a satellite image, they drew shapes around the crime scenes, marking the coordinates on the map. Then they convinced a Wake County judge they had enough probable cause to order Google to hand over account identifiers on every single cell phone that crossed the digital cordon during certain times.”</p> <p>Geofencing could also be accomplished in real-time using celt site simulators, commonly known as &#8220;<a href="https://www.eff.org/pages/cell-site-simulatorsimsi-catchers" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">stingrays</a>.&#8221; These devices essentially spoof cell phone towers, tricking any device within range into connecting to the stingray instead of the tower. This allows law enforcement to sweep up communications content, as well as locate and track the person in possession of a specific phone or other electronic device.</p> <p>Some argue that this kind of mass surveillance is necessary to catch &#8220;bad guys.&#8221; But what happens when the government defines a person stopping at the gun store or <a href="https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2020/04/12/kentucky-churches-hold-in-person-easter-services-despite-order/5127260002/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">attending a church</a> a &#8220;bad guy?&#8221;</p> <p>Government powers never shrink. They only expand. Each expansion begets new expansions. It is imperative to place absolute limits on surveillance. We can&#8217;t trust government agents to limit themselves. As Patrick Henry warned, &#8220;Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed in the sole chance of their rulers being good men without a consequent loss of liberty.&#8221;</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Surveillance Coronavirus geofencing Privacy Mike Maharrey An Uncomfortable Fact About all that “Stimulus” and Borrowing https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/an-uncomfortable-fact-about-all-that-stimulus-and-borrowing/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:d2794018-0e99-045d-4ec7-b3fbe66f991c Tue, 12 May 2020 16:47:09 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/an-uncomfortable-fact-about-all-that-stimulus-and-borrowing/" title="An Uncomfortable Fact About all that &#8220;Stimulus&#8221; and Borrowing" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-279x157.jpg 279w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-768x432.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-1080x608.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The U.S. Treasury Department recently announced it plans to borrow $2.9 trillion in the second quarter of this year. Never forget borrowed money HAS to be paid back. You&#8217;re either going to see more taxation or inflation. Probably both. #NeverForget: Borrowed money HAS to be paid back. You&#39;re either going to see more taxation or [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/an-uncomfortable-fact-about-all-that-stimulus-and-borrowing/" title="An Uncomfortable Fact About all that &#8220;Stimulus&#8221; and Borrowing" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-279x157.jpg 279w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-768x432.jpg 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-1080x608.jpg 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/07/money-burn-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>The U.S. Treasury Department recently announced it plans to borrow $2.9 trillion in the second quarter of this year. Never forget borrowed money HAS to be paid back. You&#8217;re either going to see more taxation or inflation. Probably both.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-dnt="true"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NeverForget?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NeverForget</a>: Borrowed money HAS to be paid back. You&#39;re either going to see more taxation or inflation. Or both. <a href="https://twitter.com/mmaharrey10th?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mmaharrey10th</a> <a href="https://t.co/2WMsRNq6pU">pic.twitter.com/2WMsRNq6pU</a></p> <p>&mdash; TenthAmendmentCenter (@TenthAmendment) <a href="https://twitter.com/TenthAmendment/status/1257789703325020166?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 5, 2020</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <p><strong>For Further Reading</strong></p> <p class="entry-title"><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/12/that-didnt-take-long-u-s-national-debt-exceeds-24-trillion/">That Didn’t Take Long: U.S. National Debt Exceeds $24 Trillion</a></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-federal-reserve-more-lethal-than-coronavirus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Federal Reserve: More Lethal than Coronavirus</a></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/29/what-next-trillion-dollar-coins/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">What Next? Trillion Dollar Coins?</a></p> <p class="pt-cv-title"><a class="_blank cvplbd" href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/09/the-feds-war-on-savings/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Fed’s War on Savings</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Current Events Economics Tenther Essentials budget deficit Economy Federal Reserve government spending National Debt Mike Maharrey Government Wrecks Everything It Touches https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/government-wrecks-everything-it-touches/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:6c74c148-fc6c-7798-a9f6-5c516b927e54 Tue, 12 May 2020 15:13:09 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/government-wrecks-everything-it-touches/" title="Government Wrecks Everything It Touches" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-300x169.png 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-768x432.png 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-1024x576.png 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-178x100.png 178w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-50x28.png 50w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-75x42.png 75w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Government claims to protect you but in reality, it wrecks everything it touches, including your liberty. I talked about it in a recent interview on the Wasatch Report. In this interview, I talk with Suzanne Sherman and Jeff Johnson about how Congress set the stage for the current breakdown in the meat supply chain decades [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/government-wrecks-everything-it-touches/" title="Government Wrecks Everything It Touches" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-300x169.png 300w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-768x432.png 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-1024x576.png 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-178x100.png 178w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-50x28.png 50w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-75x42.png 75w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2017/11/video-thumbnail-centralized-power-congress-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Government claims to protect you but in reality, it wrecks everything it touches, including your liberty. I talked about it in a recent interview on the Wasatch Report.<span id="more-34686"></span></p> <p><iframe src="https://anchor.fm/the-wasatch-report/embed/episodes/The-Wasatch-Report-Episode-6-Guest-Mike-Maharrey-ednbbr/a-a24gfc5" height="102px" width="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></p> <p>In this interview, I talk with Suzanne Sherman and Jeff Johnson about how <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/08/congress-broke-the-meat-supply-chain-50-years-ago/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Congress set the stage for the current breakdown in the meat supply chain</a> decades ago.</p> <p>If you&#8217;ve been to the grocery, you know the cost of meat has increased drastically. You&#8217;ve probably also noticed shortages. Meanwhile, farmers are slaughtering animals. How can this be? Suzanne and I talk about how Congress broke the meat supply chain back in the 1960s.</p> <p>We also talk about AG Barr and why you should trust him to protect your freedom along with some of the other craziness we&#8217;ve seen with the government response to COVID-19.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Current Events Interviews COVID-19 FDA food freedom surveillance William Barr Mike Maharrey Cops Using Pandemic as Excuse to Ramp Up Drone Surveillance https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/cops-using-pandemic-as-excuse-to-ramp-up-drone-surveillance/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:650ec3a3-c856-573e-498b-8aabb30187ee Tue, 12 May 2020 10:26:59 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/cops-using-pandemic-as-excuse-to-ramp-up-drone-surveillance/" title="Cops Using Pandemic as Excuse to Ramp Up Drone Surveillance" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />All across the country, law enforcement is using the pandemic as an excuse to use Chinese-made drones to monitor the public. This breaks every promise law enforcement has ever made regarding the use of drones. (More on that later.) A recent Miami Herald article revealed how police are using Chinese-made DJI drones to monitor the homeless and check people&#8217;s [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/cops-using-pandemic-as-excuse-to-ramp-up-drone-surveillance/" title="Cops Using Pandemic as Excuse to Ramp Up Drone Surveillance" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/12/drone-grayscale-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>All across the country, law enforcement is using the pandemic as an excuse to use Chinese-made drones to monitor the public.<span id="more-34671"></span></p> <p>This breaks every promise law enforcement has ever made regarding the use of drones. (More on that later.)</p> <p>A recent <i>Miami Herald</i> <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article242370226.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">article</a> revealed how police are using Chinese-made <a href="https://www.dji.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">DJI</a> drones to monitor the homeless and check people&#8217;s temperatures.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;Last month, police departments in Daytona Beach and Connecticut unveiled what was initially touted as a potential new tool against a pandemic: drones capable of taking a person’s temperature from 300 feet in the air.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>The article, written by Charles Rabin, said that both agencies stopped using thermal imaging drones after civil liberty groups warned that police drones have essentially become “Big Doctor” in the sky.</p> <p>A person&#8217;s health information is protected under federal law thus posing the question,  &#8220;Are drone readings, even with sophisticated infrared sensors, a trustworthy way to protect public health without violating individual rights?&#8221;</p> <p>But none of that matters to American law enforcement. In Florida, the Daytona Police Department has found a way to justify using drones to check a person&#8217;s health.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;But after public backlash, Westport police killed the plan before it was activated. And police in Daytona Beach clarified that the technology hasn’t been used to seek out random fevers in public spaces. Daytona Beach Police spokesman Messod Bendayon conceded the drone had been used but not to search public spaces for random fevers.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>The Daytona Police Departments&#8217; justification for using drones is intentionally misleading. Either police are using thermal imaging drones on the public or they are not. There is no middle ground when it comes to using drones to invade the public&#8217;s privacy.</p> <p>An <a href="https://www.news-journalonline.com/news/20200504/coronavirus-daytonarsquos-homeless-struggle-through-pandemic" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">article</a> in the<i> Daytona Beach Journal</i> revealed just how misleading the Daytona Police Department has been about using drones to monitor the marginalized.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;When the homeless do gather in groups, the police department’s drones have swooped in to ask them to disperse, Buck James, executive director of Halifax Urban Ministries said. </i></p></blockquote> <p>A comment made by Tom Sherick, who’s been homeless in Daytona Beach on and off for six years, was a little more revealing. “Sometimes people driving by will see you and give you food, but the cops try to shut it down,” Sherick said.</p> <p>Ask yourself, could the police also be using drones to monitor motorists who stop to feed the homeless?</p> <p>According to a recent <a href="https://theappeal.org/miami-police-arrest-homeless/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">article</a> in <i>The Appeal,</i> the Miami Police Department has arrested 30 percent of the homeless population for not practicing social distancing and breaking curfew.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;On March 27, Miami area officers arrested two homeless men for unlawfully using a dairy crate—a Florida law that effectively allows police to arrest homeless people for sitting.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>In the seven weeks since Miami-Dade County issued its stay-at-home order, the police have arrested 3,526  homeless people.</p> <p>The COVID-19 excuse to target the homeless and invade our privacy appears to be in full swing as police use drones to warn people to social distance.</p> <p>As <i>USA Today</i> explains people have a right to privacy.</p> <blockquote><p><i>“People have a right to privacy. You can’t just take their temperature without any reason. I think this is just an example of something that police departments have a tendency to do. Someone sells them on a new technology and they can come up with what they think is reason to use it and they use it, but they don’t necessarily think about how invasive it might be,” said Caleb Kruckenberg, litigation counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance. </i></p></blockquote> <p>Earlier, I mentioned that law enforcement broke every promise they ever made about using drones except during an emergency.  For years, law enforcement defined what constituted an <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/nypd-powers-up-drone-squad-and-promises-not-to-spy-on-people/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">emergency</a> as a &#8216;search and rescue, hostage situation, missing child or adult, remote crime scenes, incidents involving hazardous materials, monitoring crowds at large events and collision documentation&#8217;.</p> <p>Not once in their millions of promises to the public, did law enforcement try and justify using thermal imaging drones to scan everyone. (A Google search for &#8220;police promise drones only used in an emergency&#8221; returned a staggering 4.3 million hits.)</p> <p>The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) posted some interesting thoughts about allowing police to use thermal imaging drones.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;We’d want guarantees that such drones are part of a temporary public health approach to social distancing, and not a permanent criminal justice approach to gatherings in public places. For example, there would need to be guidelines that would only allow public health officials, rather than law enforcement, access to the drones.&#8221;<br /> </i></p></blockquote> <p>As laudable as EFF&#8217;s efforts are, it is hard to see anyone stopping the tidal wave of fear that has gripped America during this pandemic.</p> <p>As I mentioned <a href="https://massprivatei.blogspot.com/2020/04/cctv-cameras-are-being-turned-into.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">last month</a>, it is only a matter of time before police drones and CCTV cameras are turned into heartbeat measuring monsters.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;The new model will have several advanced features to the typical infrared cameras that are currently being used to measure body surface temperature. The VSBLTY-Photon-X cameras will additionally measure heartbeat and oxygen saturation levels with the goal of helping to produce less false positives than the standard infrared cameras now in use.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>EFF also <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/05/using-drones-fight-covid-19-slipperiest-all-slopes" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">revealed</a> how law enforcement is using the pandemic as an excuse to increase public surveillance.</p> <blockquote><p><i>&#8220;No government agencies should use this moment to purchase new drones, which ensures that agencies would find excuses in the future to use the drones for other purposes, in order to justify the initial expense. We don’t want more government drones flying over concerts and rallies in the not-so-distant future.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote> <p>The fight to keep our privacy is a never-ending battle against government and corporate interests that want to know everything about everyone.</p> <p><strong>EDITOR&#8217;S NOTE</strong></p> <p><em>Much of the funding for drones at the state and local level comes from the federal government, in and of itself a constitutional violation. In return, federal agencies tap into the information gathered by state and local law enforcement through fusion centers and the Information Sharing Environment (ISE).</em></p> <p><em>Fusion centers were sold as a tool to combat terrorism, but that is not how they are being used. The ACLU pointed to a <a href="https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/media/investigative-report-criticizes-counterterrorism-reporting-waste-at-state-and-local-intelligence-fusion-centers" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bipartisan congressional report</a> to demonstrate the true nature of government fusion centers: “They haven’t contributed anything meaningful to counterterrorism efforts. Instead, they have largely served as police surveillance and information sharing nodes for law enforcement efforts targeting the frequent subjects of police attention: Black and brown people, immigrants, dissidents, and the poor.”</em></p> <p><em>According to <a href="http://www.dni.gov/index.php/about/organization/information-sharing-environment-what-we-do" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">its website</a>, the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators… have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant.</em></p> <p><em>The federal government encourages and funds a network of drones at the state and local level across the U.S., thereby gaining access to a massive data pool on Americans without having to expend the resources to collect the information itself. By placing restrictions on drone use, state and local governments limit the data available that the feds can access.</em></p> <p><em>Currently, at least 19 states—Alaska, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin—require law enforcement agencies in certain circumstances to obtain a search warrant to use drones for surveillance or to conduct a search.</em></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Drones Coronavirus drones Fourth Amendment Privacy surveillance jprivate Another Case Shows the Supreme Court Doesn’t Protect Liberty https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/11/another-case-shows-the-supreme-court-doesnt-protect-liberty/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:94a31b6f-fa1b-8612-8f9c-bee9f2929bee Mon, 11 May 2020 23:51:02 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/11/another-case-shows-the-supreme-court-doesnt-protect-liberty/" title="Another Case Shows the Supreme Court Doesn&#8217;t Protect Liberty" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />The Supreme Court handed down another opinion eroding the Fourth Amendment in a case that should have never gone to the federal court. Kansas v. Glover revolves around a traffic stop by Douglas County Sheriff&#8217;s Deputy Mark Mehrer. He pulled Charles Glover over after running his license plate and finding that Glover had a suspended driver&#8217;s [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/11/another-case-shows-the-supreme-court-doesnt-protect-liberty/" title="Another Case Shows the Supreme Court Doesn&#8217;t Protect Liberty" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280.jpg 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280-980x551.jpg 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/bigstock-Close-Up-Erasing-The-Fourth-Am-24731816-redacted-1280-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>The Supreme Court handed down another opinion eroding the Fourth Amendment in a case that should have never gone to the federal court.<span id="more-29176"></span></p> <p><em><a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-556_e1pf.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Kansas v. Glover</a> </em>revolves around a traffic stop by Douglas County Sheriff&#8217;s Deputy Mark Mehrer. He pulled Charles Glover over after running his license plate and finding that Glover had a suspended driver&#8217;s license. Glover entered a motion to suppresses evidence gathered during the stop, arguing there was no reasonable suspicion of an actual crime. The deputy stopped the car based on the assumption that the registered owner was probably driving.</p> <p>The district court granted the motion. An appellate court overturned the lower court. The Kansas Supreme Court reversed again, holding that the stop violated the Fourth Amendment. According to the Kansas Supreme Court, Mehrer did not have reasonable suspicion to pull the vehicle over because his inference that Glover was behind the wheel amounted to “only a hunch.&#8221; The court further held the deputy&#8217;s “hunch” involved “applying and stacking unstated assumptions that are unreasonable without further factual basis.&#8221;</p> <p>Kansas prosecutors appealed to the Supreme Court and it overturned the Kansas Supreme Court in an 8-1 decision. Writing for the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas said Mehrer &#8220;drew the commonsense inference that Glover was likely the driver of the vehicle, which provided more than reasonable suspicion to initiate the stop &#8230; The fact that the registered owner of a vehicle is not always the driver of the vehicle does not negate the reasonableness of [the officer&#8217;s] inferences.&#8221;</p> <p>In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the majority opinion &#8220;destroys Fourth Amendment jurisprudence that requires individualized suspicion.&#8221;</p> <p><a href="https://reason.com/2020/04/06/sotomayor-upbraids-scotus-for-a-decision-that-destroys-fourth-amendment-jurisprudence-that-requires-individualized-suspicion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Reason</em> lamented the decision</a> by highlighting Sotomayor&#8217;s dissent.</p> <p>Sotomayor was not wrong.</p> <p>But this case was not a federal case. It should have never gone to the Supreme Court. And it wouldn&#8217;t have except for the bastardization of the 14th Amendment known as the &#8220;<a href="https://www.michaelmaharrey.com/constitution-101-the-incorporation-doctine-did-the-14th-amendment-bind-the-staes-to-the-bill-of-rights-942/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">incorporation doctrine</a>.&#8221;</p> <p>The Supreme Court invented the incorporation doctrine out of thin air 57 years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment to apply the federal Bill of Rights to state governments.</p> <p>A lot of civil libertarians like the incorporation doctrine because they believe the federal courts will protect our liberty from overreaching, onerous state and local governments. In theory, the incorporation doctrine empowers federal courts to police the states in order to stop state governments from violating individual rights. In practice, it centralizes power at the federal level and allows the Supreme Court to apply liberty-destroying decisions to the entire United States.</p> <p>The theory falls apart because federal courts rarely hand down decisions that expand liberty. They almost always increase government power and place limitations on individual rights.</p> <p><em>Kansas v. Glover</em> provides an example of the tendency in the extreme. The state court handed down a decision that protected liberty and restrained government, only to be overruled by the central authority.</p> <p>Sadly, the Kansas Supreme Court opened the door to federal intervention by basing its decision on the Fourth Amendment of the federal Bill of Rights. It should have rested its case on the <a href="https://www.kssos.org/other/pubs/KS_Constitution.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Kansas state constitution</a>. The state bill of rights § 15 reads as follows:</p> <blockquote><p>&#8220;Search and seizure. The right of the people to be secure in their persons and property against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall be inviolate; and no warrant shall issue but on probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or property to be seized.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>There was no need to invoke the Fourth Amendment. But the Fourth Amendment got invoked because thanks to the incorporation doctrine, everything now qualifies as a federal case.</p> <p>So, why do so many liberty-minded people possess this impulse to centralize power? What drives their fixation on monopolizing decision-making at the highest level?</p> <p>In a nutshell &#8211; power. They operate on the misguided notion that they can someday gain control of the levers of power and impose liberty top-down.</p> <p>The problem is it never happens. Centralized government is antithetical to individual liberty. It will never care about you.</p> <p>And you will <em>never</em> control it.</p> <p>&#8220;But, what if the state courts get it wrong?&#8221;  they plead. &#8220;State and local governments can be just as tyrannical as the federal government,&#8221; they insist. &#8220;Are you saying we just have to put up with state or local tyranny?&#8221;</p> <p>Fair questions. State courts often do get it wrong. The judicial branches of both state and federal governments typically side with the government when it comes to the extent of the government&#8217;s powers. But a bad outcome at the state level only applies to that state. A bad outcome at the Supreme Court ends up as a judicial precedent that applies all across the entire United States.</p> <p><em>Kansas v. Glover</em> illustrates the worst-case scenario. In this instance, the state court <strong>got it right</strong>. It was a win for liberty for Kansans. But thanks to the incorporation doctrine and the Supreme Court, we now have a judicial precedent that diminishes the Fourth Amendment and applies sets the precedent every single police department in the US will now follow.</p> <p>We just centralized our way to another loss of liberty.</p> <p>Centralizing government in the name of liberty will always fail. You might get a few crumbs from the table now and then. The Supreme Court will occasionally issue an opinion that protects liberty. But most of the time, it will hand down garbage that empowers government at the expense of your rights.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> 4th Amendment Court Cases Incorporation Doctrine 4th-amendment decentralization Kansas v Glover supreme-court Mike Maharrey The Origins of Militarized Police: From Peace Officer to Command and Control https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-origins-of-militarized-police-from-peace-officer-to-command-and-control/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:edf1d94f-8288-fa3b-30af-0e3275791fef Mon, 11 May 2020 17:53:39 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-origins-of-militarized-police-from-peace-officer-to-command-and-control/" title="The Origins of Militarized Police: From Peace Officer to Command and Control" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051120.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051120.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051120-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051120-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051120-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />To say that the militarization of the police is nothing new is to ignore America’s recent history as well as the long-standing model of a peace officer. As the feds have pushed to militarize local police, the focus has shifted from one who keeps the peace to one who enforces the law – and that’s [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/the-origins-of-militarized-police-from-peace-officer-to-command-and-control/" title="The Origins of Militarized Police: From Peace Officer to Command and Control" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051120.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051120.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051120-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/path-051120-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/path-051120-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>To say that the militarization of the police is nothing new is to ignore America’s recent history as well as the long-standing model of a peace officer. As the feds have pushed to militarize local police, the focus has shifted from one who keeps the peace to one who enforces the law – and that’s an important difference.</p> <p>Path to Liberty: May 11, 2020<span id="more-34688"></span></p> <p><iframe width="1280" height="720" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/wwHR6UsfvbM?start=137" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/war-on-liberty-an-overview-of-federal-programs-that-militarize-and-nationalize-local-police/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">War on Liberty: An Overview of Federal Programs that Militarize and Nationalize Local Police</a><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/war-on-liberty-an-overview-of-federal-programs-that-militarize-and-nationalize-local-police/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">War on Liberty: An Overview of Federal Programs that Militarize and Nationalize Local Police</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/06/police-militarization-weapons-of-war-darpa-surveillance/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Weapons of War on our Streets: A Guide to the Militarization of Police</a><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/06/police-militarization-weapons-of-war-darpa-surveillance/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Weapons of War on our Streets: A Guide to the Militarization of Police</a></p> <p><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/05/standing-armies-why-the-founders-wanted-you-to-own-military-style-weapons/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Standing Armies: Why the Founders Wanted You to Own Military-Style Weapons</a><a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/05/standing-armies-why-the-founders-wanted-you-to-own-military-style-weapons/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Standing Armies: Why the Founders Wanted You to Own Military-Style Weapons</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/a555098c-0f89-40f9-9193-bfb51bfc16bb" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/Pm2b6mLEDpts/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/d77f39a6-6c02-4b3e-ba36-fe3bec06be42" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-051120:a" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/617877397" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1OyKAYEZBPaKb" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/645169642702495/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><a href="https://dlive.tv/p/dlive-05196520+iR_FknRGR" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on DLive</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Path to Liberty Police Militarization Police-State Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 36:30 To say that the militarization of the police is nothing new is to ignore America’s recent history as well as the long-standing model of a peace officer. As the feds have pushed to militarize local police, the focus has shifted from one who keeps the pe... To say that the militarization of the police is nothing new is to ignore America’s recent history as well as the long-standing model of a peace officer. As the feds have pushed to militarize local police, the focus has shifted from one who keeps the peace to one who enforces the law – and that’s […] $1 Trillion Added to National Debt in Less Than One Month https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/1-trillion-added-to-national-debt-in-less-than-one-month/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:e5cb8483-3e34-a725-11b9-bfbbe99af5a3 Mon, 11 May 2020 09:27:38 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/1-trillion-added-to-national-debt-in-less-than-one-month/" title="$1 Trillion Added to National Debt in Less Than One Month" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Twenty-eight days. That’s how long it took to add another $1 trillion to the national debt. On April 7, the debt pushed above $24 trillion. On Tuesday, May 5, it eclipsed $25 trillion. It’s impossible to grasp just how big these numbers are. Consider that the debt is growing at an average of about $1.2 million [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/1-trillion-added-to-national-debt-in-less-than-one-month/" title="$1 Trillion Added to National Debt in Less Than One Month" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/money-toilet-flush-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Twenty-eight days.</p> <p>That’s how long it took to add another $1 trillion to the national debt.<span id="more-34670"></span><span id="more-25203"></span></p> <p>On April 7, <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/04/24-trillion-national-debt-this-will-not-end-well/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the debt pushed above $24 trillion</a>. On Tuesday, May 5, it eclipsed $25 trillion.</p> <p>It’s impossible to grasp just how big these numbers are. Consider that the debt is growing at an average of about $1.2 million per minute. Every day, Uncle Sam goes another $1.7 billion in hock.</p> <p>According to <a href="https://www.usdebtclock.org/">the National Debt Clock</a>, the debt to GDP ratio has risen to over 117 percent. Studies have shown that <a href="https://schiffgold.com/key-gold-news/federal-debt-cancer-economic-growth/">a debt to GDP ratio over 90 percent retards economic growth</a> by about 30 percent.</p> <p>Earlier this week, the U.S. Treasury Department announced plans to borrow $2.99 trillion in the second quarter. The Treasury also plans to borrow another $677 billion in the July-September quarter, bringing the total fiscal 2020 budget deficit to a projected $4.48 trillion. Given those numbers, the national debt will end fiscal 2020 over $28 trillion.</p> <p><a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-debt/trump-says-will-address-national-debt-if-re-elected-interview-idUSKBN22D639" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">President Trump said he plans to address the national debt</a> if reelected. He didn&#8217;t present any kind of plan, but he did say that the growing debt &#8220;bothers&#8221; him.  It appears the plan is just to kick the can down the road by issuing longer-term Treasuries at zero percent interest.</p> <p>“We’re putting in, we’re replacing debt with really long term good debt, zero, you know, which is a beautiful thing,&#8221; Trump said in a radio interview.</p> <p>But who the heck is going to buy long-term bonds with no yield?</p> <p>And refinancing doesn&#8217;t address the underlying issue. Uncle Sam has a spending problem. And he had a spending problem before the pandemic.</p> <p>The federal government has run deficits over $1 trillion in four fiscal years, all during the Great Recession. The fifth trillion-dollar deficit was coming down the pike this year even before the massive stimulus spending in response to coronavirus. In effect, the federal government was already engaged in fiscal stimulus despite what Trump kept calling “the greatest economy in the history of America.” The deficit featured numbers you would expect to see during a massive economic slowdown &#8212; before the pandemic. Response to the coronavirus just put spending and debt in hyperdrive.</p> <p>This isn&#8217;t the first time Trump has promised to address the national debt. He said he would take care of it when he was running for office.</p> <blockquote><p>“We’re not a rich country. We’re a debtor nation … We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt,” <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/04/02/transcript-donald-trump-interview-with-bob-woodward-and-robert-costa/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><span class="s2">Trump told <em>The Washington Post</em></span></a><em>.</em> “I think I could do it fairly quickly. … I would say over a period of eight years.”</p></blockquote> <p>Two years later, the debt <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/02/15/full-speed-to-a-fiscal-cliff-national-debt-hits-22-trillion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pushed above $22 trillion</a>.</p> <p>So, forgive me if I&#8217;m not confident about Trump&#8217;s willingness &#8211; or ability &#8211; to actually rein in spending and pay down the debt.</p> <p>But make no mistake &#8211; we will pay for this &#8211; if not us, our kids and grandkids and generations to come.</p> <p>Borrowed money has to be paid back. We are effectively taking future productivity and spending it now. There are only two ways to pay off government debt – higher taxes or inflation (devaluing your money).</p> <p>Expect both.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Debt budget deficit Donald Trump National Debt Mike Maharrey Underselling Originalism https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/10/underselling-originalism/ Tenth Amendment Center urn:uuid:79704aca-4532-c59f-014a-29e9626383ed Sun, 10 May 2020 19:33:11 +0000 <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/10/underselling-originalism/" title="Underselling Originalism" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280.png 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Constitutional originalists frequently understate the case for constitutional originalism. Professor John McGinnis is a prominent and persuasive exponent of originalism. However, in his posting, The Empire Strikes Back Against Originalism, which Michael Ramsey summarizes here, he misses some opportunities. Consider his quotation of James Madison: “I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which [&#8230;] <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/10/underselling-originalism/" title="Underselling Originalism" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280.png 1280w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280-980x551.png 980w, https://tenthamendment-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/james-madison-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Constitutional originalists frequently understate the case for constitutional originalism.<span id="more-29251"></span></p> <p>Professor John McGinnis is a prominent and persuasive exponent of originalism. However, in his posting, <a href="https://www.lawliberty.org/2020/03/05/the-empire-strikes-back-against-originalism/">The Empire Strikes Back Against Originalism</a>, which Michael Ramsey <a href="https://originalismblog.typepad.com/the-originalism-blog/2020/03/john-mcginnis-on-originalisms-enemiesmichael-ramsey.html">summarizes here</a><u>,</u> he misses some opportunities.</p> <p>Consider his quotation of James Madison: “I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone it is the legitimate Constitution.” That’s fine as far as it goes, but here is Madison’s entire passage, written in a <a href="https://founders.archives.gov/?q=%20Author%3A%22Madison%2C%20James%22%20Recipient%3A%22Lee%2C%20Henry%22&amp;s=1111311112&amp;r=22">1824 letter</a> to Henry Lee:</p> <p>“With a view to this last object, I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone it is the legitimate Constitution. And if that be not the guide in expounding it, there can be no security for a consistent and stable, more than for a faithful exercise of its powers. If the meaning of the text be sought in the changeable meaning of the words composing it, it is evident that the shape and attributes of the Government must partake of the changes to which the words and phrases of all living languages are constantly subject. What a metamorphosis would be produced in the code of law if all its ancient phraseology were to be taken in its modern sense. And that the language of our Constitution is already undergoing interpretations unknown to its founders, will I believe appear to all unbiassed Enquirers into the history of its origin and adoption. Not to look further for an example, take the word “consolidate” in the address of the Convention prefixed to the Constitution. It then and there meant to give strength and solidity to the Union of the states. In its current &amp; controversial application it means a destruction of the states, by transfusing their powers into the government of the Union.”</p> <p>Professor McGinnis’ extract might suggest Madison was merely making a theoretical observation, when he was actually launching a full-throated attack on what we would call “living constitutionalism.” The complete passage forces the question: Why should we apply to Madison’s constitution an interpretative technique he so roundly repudiated?</p> <p>As a general matter, originalists tend to understate their case in at least three ways:</p> <ul> <li>They understate how long originalism has prevailed in Anglo-American documentary interpretation;</li> <li>they do not emphasize the degree to which originalism has prevailed, and still prevails, throughout Anglo-American jurisprudence; and</li> <li>they downplay the role of the subjective understanding behind a document’s words in fixing the meaning of those words.</li> </ul> <p>First: Professor McGinnis’s posting provides an example of temporal understatement in his remark that originalism “has been around since the early republic,” citing Madison’s 1824 letter.</p> <p>But by 1824 Anglo-American courts had been applying originalist methodology for centuries. Specifically, the “intent of the makers” had been the lodestar of documentary construction since at least the 1500s. My <a href="https://i2i.org/wp-content/uploads/Founders-Hermeneutic.pdf">2007 article</a> on the subject contains many examples, but here is one from the Founding-era:  In 1782, the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals decided <em>Commonwealth v. Caton</em>. It applied originalist methods to the Virginia constitution, with judges referring repeatedly to the “makers of the constitution” and what was “intended by the framers” (who were, in this case, also the document’s ratifiers). Participants in the <em>Caton</em> case included several Founders of the first and second rank, including Edmund Randolph (as an advocate) and Edmund Pendleton (as a judge).</p> <p>Anti-originalists sometimes contend that originalism is a creation of modern conservatives. History renders this claim risible.</p> <p>Second: Originalists need to emphasize that the “intent of the makers” standard is not unique to constitutional interpretation. It is, and long has been, the standard for interpreting documents generally. Pre-Founding-era and Founding-era legal sources show the “intent of the makers” guiding construction of documents of all kinds, with the notable exception of real estate conveyances. Of course, the identity of the “makers” varied with the nature of the instrument. For a statute, the “makers” were the legislators (not the legislative drafters); for a will, the testator; for a contract, the contracting parties; for a constitution, the ratifiers.</p> <p>Today we usually refer to the “the intent of the parties” rather than the intent of the makers, but originalism remains the prevailing rule of documentary construction throughout the law. In fact, it has expanded its empire to include real estate conveyances, as I showed in my conveyancing treatise many years ago (<em><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Law-Deeds-Real-Property/dp/0316598763">Modern Law of Deeds to Real Property</a>,</em> Little, Brown &amp;Co., 1992).</p> <p>In my view, far too many constitutional commentators (both originalists and non-originalists) arrive at their positions without significant experience in other areas of the law. Exposure to a variety of legal subjects helps us understand the product of the framers, most of who had multi-subject law practice experience before they started writing constitutions. If we required law professors with constitutional ambitions to work first in fields such as contracts, property, and estates, then I think claims that originalism is unique or fabricated for conservative ends would largely disappear.</p> <p>Third: Perhaps in reaction to Professor Jeff Powell’s much-cited <a href="https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1390&amp;context=faculty_scholarship">1985 law review article</a>—or in reaction to Justice Scalia’s views of statutory interpretation—many originalists have unwisely distanced themselves from the ratifiers’ subjective understanding in favor of objective public meaning.</p> <p>Yet in other areas of the law, when coherent evidence of subjective understanding is available, courts give it great, often decisive, weight. When the evidence demonstrates sufficiently that the written words differ from the subjective understanding, courts often employ the equitable remedy of reformation to ensure that the words comply with the understanding.</p> <p>Contrary to Jeff Powell’s thesis, the jurisprudence of the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries demonstrates that Anglo-American lawyers similarly valued the subjective understanding behind documents being construed. When good evidence of subjective understanding was available, courts used it to clarify the words. Occasionally—as the court did unanimously in the <em>Caton</em> case—subjective understanding could trump the words. Thus, the following maxims were common during the Founding-era: <em>Ut verba serviant intentioni &amp; non intentio verbis</em> (“So that the words serve the intention and not the intention the words ”) and <em>Qui haeret in litera haeret in cortice</em>. (“Who sticks [only] to the letter sticks to the bark”).</p> <p>I am not, of course, suggesting that courts re-write the text of the Constitution to conform to ratifier understanding. (Aside from perhaps one or two clauses, there is very little variance.) But where subjective understanding is clear, we should unapologetically apply it in construing the text.</p> <p>Originalism is not some competing theory of fairly recent origin, or even of 19th century origin. It has been the dominant method of documentary interpretation in our legal system—and a central feature of the rule of law—for at least five centuries. Originalists need to start saying so.</p> <p>Note: A fuller examination of constitutional and other documentary interpretation at the Founding appears in Robert G. Natelson, <a href="https://i2i.org/wp-content/uploads/Founders-Hermeneutic.pdf"><em>The Founders’ Hermeneutic: The Real Original Understanding of Original Intent</em>, </a>68 Ohio St. L.J. 1239 (2007).</p> <p><strong>This article <a href="https://originalismblog.typepad.com/the-originalism-blog/2020/03/underselling-originalismrob-natelson.html">first appeared</a> in The Originalism Blog.</strong></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Constitution Founding Principles Originalism Rob Natelson SCOTUS Punts Again On Gun Rights https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/scotus-punts-again-on-gun-rights/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:a0cc5f4d-de1a-7195-0f10-8874471268db Fri, 08 May 2020 21:30:27 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/scotus-punts-again-on-gun-rights/" title="SCOTUS Punts Again On Gun Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-279x157.png 279w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-768x432.png 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-1024x576.png 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />Imagine if instead of challenging the Redcoats at Lexington and Concord the colonial Minutemen had taken the issue up in the British court system. Does anyone believe that it would have been a more appropriate, more effective, and more successful way of protecting our right to keep and bear arms? Probably not. Relying on the [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/scotus-punts-again-on-gun-rights/" title="SCOTUS Punts Again On Gun Rights" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-279x157.png 279w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-768x432.png 768w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-1024x576.png 1024w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-1080x608.png 1080w" sizes="(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2019/04/bigstock-US-Constitution-with-Hand-Gun-bear-arms-54437348-1280-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>Imagine if instead of challenging the Redcoats at Lexington and Concord the colonial Minutemen had taken the issue up in the British court system. Does anyone believe that it would have been a more appropriate, more effective, and more successful way of protecting our right to keep and bear arms?<span id="more-34658"></span></p> <p>Probably not.</p> <p>Relying on the court system is a terrible way to protect gun rights.</p> <p>Although the U.S. Supreme Court has in recent years upheld the basic right to keep and bear arms in some ways, a recent lawsuit shows how inconsistent the court, and that strategy for liberty can be.</p> <p>According to <a href="https://selfreliancecentral.com/2020/04/29/the-supreme-court-punts-on-an-easy-second-amendment-case/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Self-Reliance Central</a>, SCOTUS <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-280_ba7d.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">declined to hear the case</a> of <em>New York Rifle &amp; Pistol Association v. City of New York</em>, which might have clarified previous high court rulings on the Second Amendment such as <em>District of Columbia v. Heller</em>.</p> <p>The 2013 lawsuit involved a New York City ordinance severely restricting the ability of gun owners to carry their firearms outside their homes. The city insists the law is constitutional. Further, the city argues that eve even if the law does infringe on &#8220;Second Amendment rights,&#8221; it is still constitutionally permissible because it&#8217;s “necessary to protect the public safety.”  In a <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-280_ba7d.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">6-3 decision</a>, the SCOTUS effectively washed their hands of the case and sent it back down to the lower courts without ruling on the merits.</p> <p>The city avoided SCOTUS review by slightly amending the law to allow gun owners to carry a firearm to a gun range outside the city limits while maintaining most of the restrictions. The Court determined that the case is now moot since the city changed the law. According to Self Reliance Central, the majority ignored existing precedent.</p> <blockquote><p>&#8220;Under existing precedent, cases are only declared moot when “it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party.” And the dissenters rightly point out that the amended law did not, in fact, give the petitioners in the case everything they sought.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>While challenging unconstitutional laws that infringe on gun rights is one method of combating tyranny, the courts can’t be trusted to take the right side. This isn&#8217;t the first time the Court has punted on a Second Amendment Case. Last year, SCOTUS declined to hear a <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/06/the-supreme-court-demonstrates-again-why-it-cant-be-trusted-to-defend-our-gun-rights/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">case involving a Kansas gun rights law</a>.</p> <p>Also, this isn&#8217;t an issue with the Second Amendment, which was only intended to apply to the federal government. Even then, that amendment has been repeatedly violated <a title="Americans Cannot and Should Not Trust Congress to Protect Their Gun Rights" href="http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/11/americans-cannot-and-should-not-trust-congress-to-protect-their-gun-rights/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">starting as far back as the 1930s</a>. Those federal gun control laws remain on the books, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) continues to operate even though it has no legal authority to do so.</p> <p>The reality is that other strategies could have been employed by New Yorkers in the seven years between the time the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit and SCOTUS punted on the issue, whether it’s civil disobedience and mass noncompliance or convincing willing local government officials not to enforce the law. Laws are only as good as they are getting people to obey them, and when there is significant opposition, laws tend to either get ignored or repealed.</p> <p>Waiting for the courts to make things right is like sitting in the desert waiting for an oasis to appear. It might, but you shouldn&#8217;t stake your life, or your rights, on that happening.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Court Cases Right to Keep and Bear Arms New York City New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York New York State Constitution SCOTUS TJ Martinell New Maryland Law Bans Warrantless Stingray Spying; Hinders Federal Surveillance Program https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/new-maryland-law-bans-warrantless-stingray-spying-hinders-federal-surveillance-program/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:6659b9f8-c95f-0e63-1e85-ea4359f79a91 Fri, 08 May 2020 21:24:53 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/new-maryland-law-bans-warrantless-stingray-spying-hinders-federal-surveillance-program/" title="New Maryland Law Bans Warrantless Stingray Spying; Hinders Federal Surveillance Program" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />ANNAPOLIS, Md. (May 8, 2020) – Yesterday, Maryland Gov. Lawrence Hogan announced he would allow a bill to ban the use of “stingrays” to track the location of phones without a warrant and prohibit police from sweeping up electronic communications to go into law without his signature. Del. David Moon (D), along with three fellow [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/new-maryland-law-bans-warrantless-stingray-spying-hinders-federal-surveillance-program/" title="New Maryland Law Bans Warrantless Stingray Spying; Hinders Federal Surveillance Program" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020.png" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020.png 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020-980x551.png 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020-480x270.png 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/02/stingray-general-feb-2020-150x150.png" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p><strong>ANNAPOLIS</strong>, Md. (May 8, 2020) – Yesterday, Maryland Gov. Lawrence Hogan announced he would allow a bill to ban the use of “stingrays” to track the location of phones without a warrant and prohibit police from sweeping up electronic communications to go into law without his signature.<span id="more-34676"></span></p> <p>Del. David Moon (D), along with three fellow Democrats, introduced House Bill 499 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/MD/bill/HB499/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">HB499</a>) on Jan. 24. Sen. Charles Sydnor (D-Baltimore) sponsored the companion, Senate Bill 246 (<a href="https://legiscan.com/MD/bill/SB246/2020" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">SB246</a>). The new law helps block the use of cell-site simulators, known as “<a href="https://www.eff.org/pages/cell-site-simulatorsimsi-catchers" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">stingrays</a>.” These devices essentially spoof cell phone towers, tricking any device within range into connecting to the stingray instead of the tower. This allows law enforcement to sweep up communications content, as well as locate and track the person in possession of a specific phone or other electronic device.</p> <p>The new law adds provisions to existing Maryland statutes limiting warrantless location tracking through electronic devices to address the use of cell-site simulators. Under the law, police will be required to get a court order based on probable cause before deploying a stingray device. The law also bars police from using a stingray to obtain communication content and spells out explicit criteria law enforcement must meet in order to justify such an order.</p> <p>On Feb. 27, the House passed HB499 by a 132-4 vote. The Senate concurred with a unanimous vote of 45-0. The law will go into effect on Oct. 1, 2020.</p> <p>The new law includes limitations on the use of stingrays even with a court order. These restrictions require police to restrict the investigative use of any third–party or non-target data without a further court order. The law requires the deletion of any incidentally gathered information on persons not named in the court order immediately upon the expiration of the order.</p> <p>Information gathered in violation of the law will be subject to the exclusionary rule as judicially determined. Information gathered on non-targeted devices would not be admissible in court under any circumstances.</p> <p>The law will not only protect privacy in Maryland, but it will also hinder one aspect of the federal surveillance state.</p> <p><strong>IMPACT ON FEDERAL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS</strong></p> <p>The federal government funds the vast majority of state and local stingray programs, attaching one important condition. The feds require agencies acquiring the technology to sign non-disclosure agreements. This throws a giant shroud over the program, even preventing judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys from getting information about the use of stingrays in court. The feds actually instruct prosecutors to withdraw evidence if judges or legislators press for information. As the <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-stingray-case-20150408-story.html#page=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Baltimore Sun reported</a> in April 2015, a Baltimore detective refused to answer questions on the stand during a trial, citing a federal non-disclosure agreement.</p> <p>Defense attorney Joshua Insley asked Cabreja about the agreement.</p> <p>“Does this document instruct you to withhold evidence from the state’s attorney and Circuit Court, even upon court order to produce?” he asked.</p> <p>“Yes,” Cabreja said.</p> <p>As <a href="https://privacysos.org/node/1715" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">privacysos.org</a> put it, “The FBI would rather police officers and prosecutors let ‘criminals’ go than face a possible scenario where a defendant brings a Fourth Amendment challenge to warrantless stingray spying.”</p> <p>The <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2017/06/07/inside-the-secretive-and-intrusive-world-of-stingray-surveillance/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">experience of a Pinellas County, Florida, man further highlights the shroud of secrecy around the use of stingray devices</a>, along with the potential for abuse of power inherent in America’s law enforcement community.</p> <p>The feds sell the technology in the name of “anti-terrorism” efforts. With non-disclosure agreements in place, most police departments refuse to release any information on the use of stingrays. But information obtained from the Tacoma Police Department revealed that it uses the technology primarily for routine criminal investigations.</p> <p>Some privacy advocates argue that stingray use can never happen within the parameters of the Fourth Amendment because the technology necessarily connects to every electronic device within range, not just the one held by the target. And the information collected by these devices undoubtedly ends up in federal databases.</p> <p>The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through fusion centers and a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE. In other words, stingrays create the potential for the federal government to track the movement of millions of Americans with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.</p> <p>Fusion centers were sold as a tool to combat terrorism, but that is not how they are being used. The ACLU pointed to a <a href="https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/media/investigative-report-criticizes-counterterrorism-reporting-waste-at-state-and-local-intelligence-fusion-centers" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bipartisan congressional report</a> to demonstrate the true nature of government fusion centers: “They haven’t contributed anything meaningful to counterterrorism efforts. Instead, they have largely served as police surveillance and information sharing nodes for law enforcement efforts targeting the frequent subjects of police attention: Black and brown people, immigrants, dissidents, and the poor.”</p> <p>Fusion centers operate within the broader ISE. According to <a href="http://www.dni.gov/index.php/about/organization/information-sharing-environment-what-we-do" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">its website</a>, the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators…have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant. Known ISE partners include the Office of Director of National Intelligence which oversees 17 federal agencies and organizations, including the NSA. ISE utilizes these partnerships to collect and share data on the millions of unwitting people they track.</p> <p>The federal government encourages and funds stingrays at the state and local level across the U.S., thereby undoubtedly gaining access to a massive data pool on Americans without having to expend the resources to collect the information itself. By placing restrictions on stingray use, state and local governments limit the data available that the feds can access.</p> <p>In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. Enactment of HB499/SB246 strikes a major blow to the surveillance state and would be a win for privacy.</p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> State Bills Stingrays cell site simulator Fourth Amendment HB499 Maryland Privacy SB246 stingray surveillance Mike Maharrey Meat Supply Chain Problems? Congress Broke it 50 Years Ago https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/meat-supply-chain-problems-congress-broke-it-50-years-ago/ Tenth Amendment Center Blog urn:uuid:834c6062-fb92-fd7f-6df1-310b34225acc Fri, 08 May 2020 17:40:02 +0000 <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/meat-supply-chain-problems-congress-broke-it-50-years-ago/" title="Meat Supply Chain Problems? Congress Broke it 50 Years Ago" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" />With all kinds of news reports about meat plants having to shut down &#8211; resulting in lower supply and higher prices too &#8211; a lot of people think this is caused only by current events. But surprise, surprise &#8211; unconstitutional federal acts set the stage for all this over 50 years ago. Path to Liberty, [&#8230;] <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/meat-supply-chain-problems-congress-broke-it-50-years-ago/" title="Meat Supply Chain Problems? Congress Broke it 50 Years Ago" rel="nofollow"><img width="1280" height="720" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820.jpg" class="webfeedsFeaturedVisual wp-post-image" alt="" style="display: block; margin: auto; margin-bottom: 5px;max-width: 100%;" link_thumbnail="1" srcset="https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820.jpg 1280w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820-980x551.jpg 980w, https://3jc9u229pdq31afjhhp0b1lf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820-480x270.jpg 480w" sizes="(min-width: 0px) and (max-width: 480px) 480px, (min-width: 481px) and (max-width: 980px) 980px, (min-width: 981px) 1280px, 100vw" /></a><img width="150" height="150" src="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/files/2020/05/fast-friday-050820-150x150.jpg" class="attachment-thumbnail size-thumbnail wp-post-image" alt="" /><p>With all kinds of news reports about meat plants having to shut down &#8211; resulting in lower supply and higher prices too &#8211; a lot of people think this is caused only by current events. But surprise, surprise &#8211; unconstitutional federal acts set the stage for all this over 50 years ago.</p> <p>Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: May 8, 2020<span id="more-34673"></span></p> <p><iframe width="1280" height="720" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/zJMtjGQE1og" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></p> <p><strong>PODCAST VERSION</strong></p> <p>Subscribe: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211?app=podcast&amp;mt=2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">iTunes</a> | <a href="https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&amp;isi=691797987&amp;ius=googleplaymusic&amp;apn=com.google.android.music&amp;link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Ic7vaa26zzqtt2zmxovxwkxktem?t%3DPath_to_Liberty%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Play</a> | <a href="https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=340324&amp;refid=stpr" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stitcher</a> | <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/7iRUIPjKQLyfKbunOuYIBq" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Spotify</a> | <a href="https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/category/video/good-morning-liberty/feed/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RSS</a></p> <p><strong>SHOW LINKS:</strong><br /> <a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">JOIN TAC</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/pathtoliberty/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Show Archives</a></p> <p><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/path-to-liberty/id1440549211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Subscribe and Review on iTunes</a></p> <p><a href="https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/98-01-02-2444" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Jefferson on Consolidation to Nathaniel Macon, 23 November 1821</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.farmtoconsumer.org/blog/2015/09/10/the-wholesome-meat-act-of-1967-disaster-for-small-slaughterhouses-from-the-start/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund Info</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.westonaprice.org/wholesome-meat-act-hustle/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Propaganda: Weston A Price Reports</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.farmtoconsumer.org/blog/2016/02/26/slaughterhouse-shortage-in-the-u-s/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Slaughterhouse Shortage in the U.S.</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-23/there-aren-t-enough-slaughterhouses-to-support-the-farm-to-table-economy" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">There Aren&#8217;t Enough Slaughterhouses to Support the Farm-to-Table Economy</a></p> <p><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/05/08/congress-broke-the-meat-supply-chain-50-years-ago/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Congress Broke the Meat Supply Chain 50 Years Ago</a></p> <p><a href="https://tomwoods.com/ep-656-how-the-wholesome-meat-act-gives-us-less-wholesome-meat/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Tom Woods John Moody of Farm to Consumer</a></p> <p><strong>ALTERNATE VIDEO SOURCES</strong><br /> <a href="https://www.brighteon.com/c2fd9be0-f46f-41fc-9645-e61bbfa23121" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Brighteon</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/IJyjMTm3zVEN/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Bitchute</a></p> <p><a href="https://bittube.tv/post/3cb73caf-600b-4af2-9cef-087c7491799f" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on BitTube</a></p> <p><a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter:6/path-050820:a" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on LBRY</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.twitch.tv/videos/614917190" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Twitch.tv</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.periscope.tv/w/1BRJjQBOgbLGw" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Periscope</a></p> <p><a href="https://facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter/videos/2717707188518895/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on Facebook</a></p> <p><a href="https://dlive.tv/p/dlive-05196520+VOgIdjeZg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on DLive</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/B_7ygKunHyY/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Watch on IGTV</a></p> <p><strong>FOLLOW and SUPPORT TAC:</strong></p> <p>Become a Member: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/members/</a><br /> Email Newsletter: <a href="http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register">http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/register</a><br /> RSS: <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest">http://feeds.feedburner.com/tacdailydigest</a><br /> Brave: <a href="https://brave.com/ten992" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Use Brave Browser for Privacy and Help Support TAC</a></p> <p>YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.youtube.com/user/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/tenthamendment">http://twitter.com/tenthamendment</a><br /> Instagram: <a href="https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.instagram.com/tenthamendmentcenter/</a><br /> Periscope: <a href="https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/1zqKVOPPnZMGB" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.periscope.tv/TenthAmendment/</a><br /> Twitch: <a href="https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://www.twitch.tv/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> DLive: <a href="https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://dlive.tv/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter">https://www.facebook.com/tenthamendmentcenter</a><br /> Bitchute: <a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/X0AJnBhWbCkx/</a><br /> Minds: <a href="https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter?referrer=TenthAmendmentCenter">https://www.minds.com/TenthAmendmentCenter</a><br /> LBRY: <a href="https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter">https://lbry.tv/@TenthAmendmentCenter</a></p> <div class='ctx-subscribe-container ctx-personalization-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-social-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><div class='ctx-module-container ctx_default_placement ctx-clearfix'></div><span class="ctx-article-root"><!-- --></span> Audio/Video Congress Current Events Federal Agencies Path to Liberty Coronavirus meat Meat Supply Chain usda Wholesome Meat Act Michael Boldin Tenth Amendment Center Blog 14:48 With all kinds of news reports about meat plants having to shut down – resulting in lower supply and higher prices too – a lot of people think this is caused only by current events. But surprise, surprise – unconstitutional federal acts set the stage f... With all kinds of news reports about meat plants having to shut down – resulting in lower supply and higher prices too – a lot of people think this is caused only by current events. But surprise, surprise – unconstitutional federal acts set the stage for all this over 50 years ago. Path to Liberty, […]