Tag Archives: Supreme Court of the United States

Mike Adams ~ Did NSA Already Use Its Massive Surveillance Apparatus To Hijack The Supreme Court Decision On Obamacare?

Posted on by
Reply

NaturalNews June 11 2013

“Any analyst at any time can target anyone. Any selector, anywhere… I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authority to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge, to even the President…” – NSA spy grid whistleblower Edward Snowden.

And so it begins: the power to tap the private phone calls of a federal judge or even the President. All at the fingertips of young NSA analysts who sift through masses of private data collected through the government’s back doors into the servers of Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Apple, Skype, AOL and others. (Here’s the proof.)

But if a 29-year-old working for the NSA could wiretap a federal judge, he could also wiretap a U.S. Supreme Court justice. Anything he found that was embarrassing or even incriminating could be used in a simple blackmail threat to force that justice to change his or her decision on a key issue…

… like Obamacare.

What we’ve learned today forces us to re-examine events of 2012

Back in July of 2012, news headlines were ablaze with the revelation that Supreme Court Justice John Roberts suddenly and unexpectedly changed his decision on Obamacare, siding with big government instead of protecting individual liberties. Many facts surrounding this sudden change of decision raise huge red flags when viewed in the context of the NSA being able to wiretap anyone’s emails, phone calls and private files — including a Supreme Court justice.

As CBS news reported in 2012, “Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court’s four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama’s health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations. Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said.”

Regardless of the strength of the supporting evidence brought to Roberts during his time of consideration for the decision, nothing caused him to budge. Roberts was inexplicably immovable, even though he was now siding against nearly everything he had argued and decided in previous court cases.

No one could satisfactorily explain the decision… until the NSA PRISM scandal erupted. Now, we all of a sudden have a viable explanation for what really goes on behind the public headlines.

Continue reading →

Sartre ~ The Essence of DNA Identity

Posted on by
Reply

BATR June 9, 2013

Do you intrinsically possess individual privacy rights, based upon natural law authority, or are your civil liberties arbitrarily defined by the current whims of government? How you answer, this question speaks loudly about your understanding of the nature of your very being. Those who deem that natural law is a myth or a superstition are poised for voluntary surrender of their vital identity. The cataloging of individual essence is aberrant. Your deoxyribonucleic acid is the core element of personal uniqueness and human dignity. If your DNA is subject to government collection and storage, the right of personal privacy is destroyed.

The dramatic proliferation of coercive police powers has little correlation to an improvement in public safety. The precedent that convicted criminals lose constitutional rights has gone virtually unchallenged in a society enamored with obedience to state authority. The practice of the law and the judicial review that provides the arbitrary and capricious rulings that incessantly favors the expansion of a greater level of state control, consistently violates common law and inherent principles.

It seems that civil liberties are an underreported topic by most “so called” conservative venues. Alas, the folks on the left at Democracy Now undertake the task of covering the implications and debates the merits of greater police powers in an interview, Supreme Court OKs Unfettered DNA Collection

 ”In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the police can collect DNA samples from people they arrest even before they are convicted of a crime. Supporters of the swabbing method call it “the fingerprinting of the 21st century” that will help nab criminals and break open unsolved cases. But privacy advocates say the ruling is vague because it does not define what constitutes a “serious crime,” and could create an incentive for police to make more arrests. The Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 ruling will likely fuel an expansion of DNA swabbing nationwide.”Background on the legislation that mandates DNA mining is a very slippery slope. The DNA Identification Act of 1994 authorized the establishment of a national index of: (1) DNA identification records of persons convicted of crimes, (2) analyses of DNA samples recovered from crime scenes, and (3) analyses of DNA samples recovered from unidentified human remains. Justice for All Act of 2004 instituted material changes to the DNA Identification Act of 1994, including the:

  • creation of a new indicted persons index;
  • expansion of the offenses for which federal and military offender samples are collected;
  • enhancement of the criminal penalties for unauthorized use of NDIS;
  • authorization of one-time keyboard searches by all NDIS participants of samples not normally included in NDIS (except for voluntarily submitted elimination samples);
  • deletion of the separate requirement for semiannual external proficiency tests (although it retained the separate requirement for biannual external audits);
  • requirement for state and local forensic laboratories to be accredited by a nationally recognized program within 2 years of enactment (October 30, 2006); and
  • requirement for the FBI to report to Congress any plans to change the “core genetic markers” 180 days prior to that change taking effect.

Continue reading →

Mike Adams ~ US Government Claims 100% Ownership Over All Your DNA And Reproductive Rights; Genetic Slavery Is Already Here

Posted on by
2

NaturalNews May 19 2013

The United States government claims 100% ownership over all your DNA and reproductive rights. This astonishing revelation has emerged from the fact that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office claims the power to assign ownership of your DNA to private companies and universities who apply for patents on your genes.

To date, more than 4,000 genes have been assigned ownership to corporations and universities by the U.S. patent office. Such an assignment of ownership proves that the government believes it owns 100% of all human genes — you cannot transfer ownership of something unless you first own it yourself.

To date, 20 percent of your genetic code is owned by someone else. About two-thirds of these patents belong to private companies, and one-third belong to universities. The company that owns the most patents is called Incyte, a drug company based in California which “owns” the patents on 2,000 human genes.

Although you have never agreed to sell your body to a corporation, a multitude of corporations now claim ownership over every cell in your body. That ownership makes you a slave to their patent demands, and patent “troll” lawyers are some of the most vicious, blood-sucking demons on the planet who will threaten to drag you into a million-dollar court proceeding if you don’t pay them money. Right now, at this very minute, dozens of corporations can lay claim to your body, and those claims will be 100% upheld in the U.S. court system.

Continue reading →

J. D. Heyes ~ Fourth Amendment Victory: Warrantless Blood Test, Unreasonable Search And Seizure In DUI Cases Struck Down By The Court

Posted on by
1

NaturalNews May 18 2013

The Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights has suffered mightily of late, but the U.S. Supreme Court has recently strengthened it in a case involving drunk driving and a little requirement like a search warrant.

In a 5-4 decision, justices ruled that police who are following up on drunk driving investigations will now only be able to draw a suspect’s blood with a court order authorizing the search.

The ruling drew together justices who are typically on opposite ends of the political spectrum when it comes to constitutional decisions: Justices Sonya Sotomayor, Antonin Scalia, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy and Elena Kagan made up the majority (Kennedy is often a swing vote but Ginsberg, Sotomayor and Kagan could not be further to the left of Scalia if they tried).

‘Such laws impose significant consequences when a motorist withdraws consent’

The court’s majority said the natural expiration of alcohol in the bloodstream is not a “destruction of evidence,” which otherwise would give police officers cause to search a suspect without a warrant.

The ruling in Missouri v. McNeely stems from a Driving Under the Influence arrest in which a police officer claimed that blood was drawn without a warrant or the suspect’s prior consent because the suspect’s liver was actively filtering the alcohol in the suspect’s bloodstream and thus destroying evidence of a crime.

Continue reading →

J. D. Heyes ~ Monsanto Drags Over 400 U.S. Farmers To Court Over GM Seed Patents When Will Big Ag’s Corrupt Reign End?

Posted on by
2

NaturalNews February 24 2013

When Will Big Ag’s Corrupt Reign End?

Agri-giant Monsanto, not satisfied with being one of the world’s largest agricultural corporations, is dragging hundreds of U.S. farmers into court over alleged copyright violations for repeated usage of the company’s patented seeds.

In a case that has surprised a lot of observers, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear one of these complaints on Feb. 19. That case, Bowman v. Monsanto Co., was billed as a landmark battle pitting farmer Vernon Bowman against the international Ag-giant over the former’s repeated use of seeds he bought from Monsanto which the company says are only supposed to be used for one growing season.

In advance of the case, The Huffington Post reported, the Center for Food Safety and the Save Our Seeds campaigning organizations released a report detailing similar cases.

Price of seeds have skyrocketed

According to that report titled “Seed Giants vs. U.S. Farmers,” which readers can view here, Monsanto alleges seed patent infringement in 144 lawsuits against 410 farmers and 56 small farm businesses in at least 27 states, as of January of this year.

Combined, Monsanto, Syngenta and DuPont hold more than half – 53 percent – of the global commercial seed market, which the groups claim in their report has led to a massive increase in the price of seed: Between 1995 and 2011, the groups say the average cost of planting a single acre of soybeans rose a whopping 325 percent, while corn seed prices climbed a staggering259 percent.

Monsanto especially says that seed patents are a form of biological patent and that means the company’s seeds – which are genetically modified to ward off bugs and weeds, though some strains of each are becoming increasing resistant to them – are legally protected inventions or discoveries in biology, HuffPo reported.

Continue reading →

US Court Rules Against Reclassification Of Marijuana

Posted on by
7

Activist Post | January 22, 2013

jury nullification weed (2)The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling today in the medical marijuana reclassification case, Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration. In a 2-1 decision, the Court granted standing in the case — the right to bring a claim against the federal government — but denied the legal challenge on the merits, agreeing with the government’s assertion that “adequate and well-controlled studies” on the medical efficacy of marijuana do not exist.

“To deny that sufficient evidence is lacking on the medical efficacy of marijuana is to ignore a mountain of well-documented studies that conclude otherwise,” said Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access (ASA), the country’s leading medical marijuana advocacy organization, which appealed the denial of the rescheduling petition in January of last year.

“The Court has unfortunately agreed with the Obama Administration’s unreasonably raised bar on what qualifies as an ‘adequate and well-controlled’ study, thereby continuing their game of ‘Gotcha.’”

ASA intends to seek En Banc review by the full D.C. Circuit and,necessary, the organization will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

ASA intends to argue that the Obama Administration has acted arbitrarily and capriciously by using continually changing standards of “medical efficacy” in order to maintain marijuana as a Schedule I substance, a dangerous drug with no medical value.

Continue reading →

Vermont Supreme Court Blocks Limitless Searches [Video]

Posted on by
1

RTAmerica | December 18 2012

In the state of Vermont, the Supreme Court has ruled that there are limits when it comes to searching a suspect’s electronic devices. This comes after a person in Vermont was using someone else’s identity to apply for credit cards online. Law enforcement asked a judge to search all the computers in the home, but the judge ruled that police could only search items related to the crime. RT’s Web Producer Andrew Blake brings us more on the case.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Bill Moyers & Michael Winship ~ Justice To The Highest Bidder

Posted on by
1

Reader Supported News | October 15 2012

A detail of the West Facade of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington. (photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

When the National Football League ended its lockout of the professional referees and the refs returned to call the games, all across the country players, fans, sponsors and owners breathed a sigh of relief. Fans were grateful for the return of qualified judges to keep things on the up and up.

After the now infamous Seattle Seahawks-Green Bay Packers game, when questionable calls by the replacement refs led to a disputed 14-12 win by the Seahawks, even union-busting Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan, the pride of Janesville, Wisconsin, became – briefly – fans of organized labor, calling for a negotiated peace and bringing the real refs back on the field.

In Baltimore, when the professional referees returned for their first game of the season, fans gave them a standing ovation. One held a sign: “Finally! We get to yell at real refs! Welcome back!” As the captains of the Ravens and Cleveland Browns met at the center of the field for the coin toss, veteran official Gene Steratore turned on his microphone greeted them with, “Good evening, men. It’s good to be back.” The stadium erupted in a roar.

It was a revealing glimpse into a basic truth of American sports: Without the guys who enforce the rules, everything else is pointless. As New York Giants linebacker Michael Boley reminded us, too many missed and blown calls put “the integrity of the game” at stake.

In sports we choose sides – our team against your team – but we want the referees to be skilled and impartial. We expect the same from the judges in our courtrooms, too. How much faith could any of us have in a judge who’s taken cash from either litigant in a trial – or who owes his position on the bench to a partisan clique manipulating votes? Yet 38 states elect their high court judges, and large sums of money – much of it from secret donors – are pouring into many of those judicial races.

Continue reading →

Alan Hart ~ Carter Slams U.S. Supreme Court For Its Endorsement Of Corruption

Posted on by
3

Veterans Today | October 2 2012 | Thanks, Minty

I have often said and written that in some important respects America is the least democratic country in the world because what passes for democracy there is for sale to the highest bidders (the Zionist lobby being one of them). It’s now apparent that former President Jimmy Carter agrees.

In his latest Conversation at the Carter Center, he said:

“You know how much I raised to run against Gerald Ford? Zero. You know how much I raised to run against Ronald Reagan? Zero. You know how much will be raised this year by all presidential, Senate and House campaigns? $6 billion. That’s 6,000 millions.” (It was “zero” from private donors, corporates and individuals, because Carter accepted public funding).

That was part of his devastating indictment of the U.S. electoral process which, he said, “is shot through with financial corruption that threatens American democracy.” He added: “We have one of the worst election processes in the world right here in the United States of America, and it’s almost entirely because of the excessive influx of money.”

And that’s because of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling that gave unlimited freedom to special interest groups, which represent the wishes and demands of corporations and lobbyists of all kinds, to provide unlimited campaign funding to third-parties that don’t have to disclose their donors. (The Supreme Court justified its decision on the grounds that the First Amendment of the American Constitution prohibited government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions).

Continue reading →

TSA To Install Molecular Body Scanners [Video]

Posted on by
1

 | October 2 2012

TSA is introducing the new full body scanner system to the American airports. The scanners will be capable of detecting every tiny trace of any substance of your body to find gunpowder or any bomb making materials. However the devices can also trace the level of adrenaline in the body. RT’s Kristine Frazao has more on the subject.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

Joe Wolverton, II ~ Oklahoma State Rep. to Propose ObamaCare Nullification Bill

Posted on by
1

The New American | July 6 2012

Last week the Supreme Court of the United States exceeded its authority by declaring an unconstitutional act of Congress constitutional. While there are many powerful weapons in the fight that must be fought to dismantle ObamaCare, one of the best items in the arsenal is nullification.

Simply stated, nullification is a concept of legal statutory construction that endows each state with the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal measure that a state deems unconstitutional. Nullification is founded on the assertion that the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the central government to enact laws that are applicable to the states and the citizens thereof.

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s ObamaCare decision, state legislators and governors are boldly asserting there right to restrain the federal government and are accordingly considering bills that will stop ObamaCare’s multitude of mandates at the state border.

One of these noble state legislators is State Representative Mike Ritze of Oklahoma (pictured above, along with the Oklahoma State Capitol). Since its introduction by President Obama two years ago, Representative Ritze has fought to protect the citizens of his state from the burdens imposed by not only the individual mandate of ObamaCare, but from all effect from so many unlawful intrusions into family life that are part of the federal healthcare program.

“The federal health care law represents a radical change toward socialized medicine and the idea of the federal government forcing Americans to buy health insurance was a bold overreach,” said Ritze, a Republican from Broken Arrow. “I simply don’t see how the Supreme Court could justify upholding this law.”

When it comes to health care, Representative Ritze knows what he’s talking about. He is a family practice physician and surgeon and his wife is a nurse. It is this real-world experience with the cost of medical care that first alerted Ritze to the harm posed by ObamaCare prompting him two years ago to begin his fight against this federal overreach.

“I am going to continue my efforts to pass legislation in Oklahoma to nullify the law in our state,” said Ritze. “Although most Americans want to see our health care system improved, they do not want the government to take it over or to make important decisions for them. There is a conservative approach to fixing the system, which is to remove the government intervention already in place that has kept it from being a truly free market system.”

Continue reading →

Michael McCarty ~ Fair Warning, At The Altar Of The Black Robe

Posted on by
10

theintelhub | July 4, 2012

A lawyer I am not, but I do not require the skill of a legal sage to determine that the recent Obamacare decision has rocked the Tree of Liberty in this once great, united, United States of America. The so called “Supreme Court” has delivered a devious blow, and I can feel the treacherous poison of that dastardly deed drill deep in her anchoring roots.

I have long since lost patience with all aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In fact, I’m angry, and I don’t like that. I’m even angrier because I know that I should not have to be angry. The “Act” was unconstitutional when it was rammed down our throats without our approval. It was unconstitutional when it was sent to the Supreme Court for consideration, and it’s still unconstitutional today, no matter what they say. Even I know that.

Obamacare was put into effect with blunt force trauma, like a doctor performing intricate brain surgery with a long handled shovel. The proceedure cracked the skull and killed the patient with the first big swing, as surely as a surgically placed bullet from the gun of a skilled assassin. In this case the assassin wore a black rope, and his gun was a black ink pen held behind a tall bench in the highest court of the land.

We may never know the true motivations of the man who ultimately decided the fate of Obamacare. That may be between him and whatever god and judgements he may suffer. We do know that it is a complete and utter sham, and not even a good one at that. It is a gift from the dark side, delivered in full sunlight by a new world order as old as time itself, with a mission to create chaos out of the natural order of all good things.

Countries, like men, are the products of countless decisions which impact the makeup of the collective body, and soul. The soul can grow angry, which can make the body very sick. It does not wish to muck about the putrid innards of an angry and rageful man. Nor does it wish to live within the confines of a country so tragically damaged, and fatally diseased.

My level of anger is indescribable. A bucket of cold water in the face of it would not blunt it. It burns as hot as the primordial ember of the first man, who left the trees in search of god and human destiny. That first spark has not gone out. Forever on It waits, to burn out the eternal sickness for once, and for all. It was created just for that. It is part of my soul, and of your’s, and it will burn even brighter long after the body is gone.

Continue reading →

Ethan Bronner ~ Probation Fees Rise, Firms Profit And The Poor Go To Jail

Posted on by
4

The New York Times | July 2 2012 | Thanks, Thomas!

Cary Norton for The New York Times
Richard Earl Garrett is the lead plaintiff in the class action suit against the town of Harpersville, Ala. Mr. Garrett has spent a total of 24 months in jail and owes $10,000, all for traffic and license violations that began a decade ago.

CHILDERSBURG, Ala. — Three years ago, Gina Ray, who is now 31 and unemployed, was fined $179 for speeding. She failed to show up at court (she says the ticket bore the wrong date), so her license was revoked. When she was next pulled over, she was, of course, driving without a license. By then her fees added up to more than $1,500. Unable to pay, she was handed over to a private probation company and jailed — charged an additional fee for each day behind bars.

For that driving offense, Ms. Ray has been locked up three times for a total of 40 days and owes $3,170, much of it to the probation company. Her story, in hardscrabble, rural Alabama, where Krispy Kreme promises that “two can dine for $5.99,” is not about innocence. It is, rather, about the mushrooming of fines and fees levied by money-starved towns across the country and the for-profit businesses that administer the system. The result is that growing numbers of poor people, like Ms. Ray, are ending up jailed and in debt for minor infractions.

“With so many towns economically strapped, there is growing pressure on the courts to bring in money rather than mete out justice,” said Lisa W. Borden, a partner in Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, a large law firm in Birmingham, Ala., who has spent a great deal of time on the issue. “The companies they hire are aggressive. Those arrested are not told about the right to counsel or asked whether they are indigent or offered an alternative to fines and jail. There are real constitutional issues at stake.”

Half a century ago in a landmark case, the Supreme Court ruled that those accused of crimes had to be provided a lawyer if they could not afford one. But in misdemeanors, the right to counsel is rarely brought up, even though defendants can run the risk of jail. The probation companies promise revenue to the towns, while saying they also help offenders, and the defendants often end up lost in a legal Twilight Zone.

Here in Childersburg, where there is no public transportation, Ms. Ray has plenty of company in her plight. Richard Garrett has spent a total of 24 months in jail and owes $10,000, all for traffic and license violations that began a decade ago. A onetime employee of United States Steel Corporation, he is suffering from health difficulties and is without work. William M. Dawson, a Birmingham lawyer and Democratic Party activist, has filed a lawsuit for Mr. Garrett and others against the local authorities and the probation company, Judicial Correction Services, which is based in Georgia.

“The Supreme Court has made clear that it is unconstitutional to jail people just because they can’t pay a fine,” Mr. Dawson said in an interview.

Continue reading →