Our Bill of Rights is DEAD

7/29/2019 Our Bill of Rights is DEAD

1/9

Our Bill of Rights is DEAD?

Those who do not know true history are doomed to repeat it. Experts are telling the American peoplethat the Bill of Rights is DEAD and gone, that the only rights we have are those rights which the Supreme

Court and our federal government allow. Are they right?

Following three months of fiery debate at the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention, a U.S. Constitution

signed by 38 of the 41 delegates emerged on September 17, 1787, which we refer to today as Constitution

Day. The Constitution would not take effect until at least nine of the original thirteen colonies ratified.

Five states ratified it in quick succession, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut.

But other states refused to ratify, opposed to the document as it failed to reserve undelegated powers to

the states and lacked constitutional protection of basic rights. In February 1788, a compromise was

reached under which the other states would agree to ratify the document with the assurance thatamendments would be immediately proposed.

Fearing that constitutional text like the supremacy clause, the commerce clause, the general welfare

clause, the necessary and proper clause and others were simply too broad, more than a hundred

amendments were immediately proposed by Founders in the First Congress.

By September of 1789, the First Congress had approved twelve of those amendments. On December 15,

1791, Virginia became the 10th of 14 states to approve 10 of the 12 amendments, thus giving us the Bill

of Rights, ratified by the two-thirds majority of states necessary to make it binding.

The Bill of Rights was largely drawn from Virginia's Declaration of Rights, drafted by George Mason in

1776. Mason, a native Virginian, was a lifelong champion of individual liberties, and in 1787 he attended

the Constitutional Convention and criticized the final document for lacking constitutional protection of

basic rights. It was Mason who led the First Congress to create and ratify what we now call The Bill of

Rights, the first ten amendments to the constitution.

The U.S. Constitution would have never been ratified without assurances and protections in the Bill of

Rights. The first ten amendments removed any doubt about the intentions of the Founding Fathers in their

design for a limited federal government of, by and for the people and their states respectively, deriving all

of its just powers from the people.

The Bill of Rights is by no means a complete list of individual or states rights. It is a list of additional

limitations and restrictions upon the federal government created by the compact, the U.S. Constitution,

amending the text of the U.S. Constitution in such a manner as to remove any ambiguity concerning

certain inalienable rights of the people and their states.

The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

Congress of the United Statesbegun and held at the City of New-York, on


2/9

Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

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 its powers, that further

declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public

confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in

Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be

proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the

United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures,

to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America,

proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth

Article of the original Constitution.

The preamble to the Bill of Rights establishes the clear intent of the Founders to further clarify and

restrict federal powers, and ensure a Constitutional Republican form of government in which powerwould not only be balanced between three federal branches with unique and equal powers, but also

balanced between federal, state, local and individual rights.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people

peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to

keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner,

nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against

unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon

probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be

searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a

presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or

in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be


3/9

subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in

any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,

without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just

compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an

impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which

district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause

of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process

for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of

trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any

Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual

punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage

others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the

States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

These are not just our Bill of Rights, they are a short list of inalienable rights and they are amendments to

the U.S. Constitution, without which, the constitution itself would never have been ratified by the states, a

union of the states could not have been created and our federal government would not exist.

This is to affirm that without our Bill of Rights, intact and enforced, there is no compact between the

states at all. The product of our Founders exists in total, upon the terms and conditions of the U.S.

Constitution and Bill of Rights, or none of it exists.

Is Our Bill of Rights DEAD?


4/9

According to an increasing number ofexpert sources today, our Bill of Rights is DEAD. The peoples

silence on the matter is being interpreted as their consent.

In aremarkable video clipfrom a recent state debate over states rights in the Tennessee legislature,

lawyer andSenator Brian Kelseymade an astonishing claim that the Tenth Amendment doesnt mean

what it says, that states are subservient to the federal government under the supremacy clause, which

trumps the Bill of Rights, even when the federal government is overtly acting beyond its constitutional

authority and in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.

According toattorney Brian Kelsey, the federal supremacy clause prohibits the states and the people from

enforcing the Bill of Rights, even when it is clear that the federal government is acting in a despotic and

tyrannical fashion, in direct violation of the peoples Bill of Rights.

That is an absolutely chilling statement, especially coming from a Tennessee Republican Senator who

also holds a law degree and license to practice. Mr. Kelsey is stating that the Bill of Rights is

unenforceable due to the federal supremacy clause, thereby legally DEAD, null and void. Where did Mr.

Kelsey get such a treasonous false notion?

The answer appears to be, law school as Mr. Kelsey is by no means alone in his views. American law

schools stopped teaching constitutional law and started teaching only the procedure for creating law by

setting precedents in the mid-1940s. However, the Constitution grants the judicial branch no law-making

authority whatsoever. Todays lawyers have a totally perverted understanding of the Constitution, as a

result.

In arecent letter from Michigan State Speaker of the House Jase Bolgerdated February 22, 2013, in

which he relies upon the expert advice of his legislative attorney Doug Mains, Bolger makes the same

treasonous false claims.

Tennessee Attorney General Robert Cooper, Democrat son of Democrat U.S. Representative Jim Cooper,also goes to great lengths in his brief to assert the same false claims, establishing in his expert opinion

that the Bill of Rights is DEAD. Similar statements have been made byTexas Attorney General Greg

Abbottand numerous other federal and state officials.

When state legislators attempted to protect states and individual rights with the introduction of a

Constitutional Balance of Powers Act drafted entirely upon the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights,

leftwing groups likeDemocratic UndergroundandDaily KOScame out in force to attack those

legislators. They just couldnt grasp any state attempting to uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights by

rejecting the unconstitutional acts of a runaway federal government.

All of a sudden, leftwing propaganda machines and State Republican legislators appeared to be on thesame side, opposing states and individual rights and supporting unbridled federal supremacy. Even a

number of leftwing Democrat law professors are publicly attacking the crazy notion that the Bill of

Rights still exists in force and effect.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJj4AxFf1NE&feature=youtu.behttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJj4AxFf1NE&feature=youtu.behttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJj4AxFf1NE&feature=youtu.behttp://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/126773962/MI-Speaker-Bolger-States-Rights-Letter-2-22-13http://www.scribd.com/doc/126773962/MI-Speaker-Bolger-States-Rights-Letter-2-22-13http://www.scribd.com/doc/126773962/MI-Speaker-Bolger-States-Rights-Letter-2-22-13http://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/op/2013/op13-14.pdfhttp://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/op/2013/op13-14.pdfhttps://www.oag.state.tx.us/https://www.oag.state.tx.us/https://www.oag.state.tx.us/https://www.oag.state.tx.us/http://www.democraticunderground.com/101795540http://www.democraticunderground.com/101795540http://www.democraticunderground.com/101795540http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/26/1182278/-Mississippi-legislature-debating-creation-of-committee-to-nullify-unconstitutional-lawshttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/26/1182278/-Mississippi-legislature-debating-creation-of-committee-to-nullify-unconstitutional-lawshttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/26/1182278/-Mississippi-legislature-debating-creation-of-committee-to-nullify-unconstitutional-lawshttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/26/1182278/-Mississippi-legislature-debating-creation-of-committee-to-nullify-unconstitutional-lawshttp://www.democraticunderground.com/101795540https://www.oag.state.tx.us/https://www.oag.state.tx.us/http://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/op/2013/op13-14.pdfhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/126773962/MI-Speaker-Bolger-States-Rights-Letter-2-22-13http://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.capitol.tn.gov/senate/members/s31.htmlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJj4AxFf1NE&feature=youtu.be


5/9

Are all of these experts right? Is the Bill of Rights DEAD today?

Your silence is your consent

The leftist argument that the Bill of Rights no longer exists today is based entirely upon two totallyperverted interpretations of Constitutional Law. It is not an accidental misinterpretation either, it is with

specific purpose. The first perversion of constitutional law is in the misinterpretation of the federal

supremacy clause. The second is in the belief that the U.S. Supreme Court has the constitutional authority

to grant itself the unbridled power as an unelected oligarchy, as the court attempted to do inMarbury vs.

Madison.

What does the federal supremacy clause actually say?

Art. VI, Sec. II, Clause IIThis constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be

made in Pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of

the United States shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall bebound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Thats what the federal supremacy clause says, but what does it mean?

1) The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land2) U.S. laws made in Pursuance thereof also enjoy federal supremacy3) So long as those laws are made under the authority of the U.S.4) All judges are obligated to view laws on the above basis5) Anything in the constitution or state laws notwithstanding

This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;

First, it affirms that the U.S. Constitution is indeed the supreme law of the landand then it affirms

that the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof also have supremacy.

Note that the Founders capitalized the word Pursuance Why did the Founders capitalize the word

Pursuance and what did they mean by which shall be made in Pursuance thereof?

The Founders often capitalized a word to emphasize its importance as is the case here with Pursuance

and the power of congress to enforce The Law of Nations in the enumerated powers of congress. What

they meant by the laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof is that the laws of

the United States which were created in Pursuance, or furtherance, or affirmation, or conformity with the

U.S. Constitution, which includes the Bill of Rights, would have supremacy.

In case there are any doubts, even theLaw Dictionarygives a constitutionally correct accounting of the

supremacy clause

Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution is known as the Supremacy Clause because it

provides that the "Constitution, and the Laws of the United States shall be the supreme Law ofthe Land." It means that the federal government, in exercising any of the powers enumerated in

the Constitution, must prevail over any conflicting or inconsistent state exercise of power.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Supremacy+Clausehttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Supremacy+Clausehttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Supremacy+Clausehttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Supremacy+Clause


6/9

The concept of federal supremacy was developed by Chief Justice John Marshall, who led the

Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835. In mcculloch v. maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 4 L. Ed.

579 (1819), the Court invalidated a Maryland law that taxed all banks in the state, including a

branch of the national bank located at Baltimore. Marshall held that although none of the

enumerated powers of Congress explicitly authorized the incorporation of the national bank, the

Necessary and Proper Clause provided the basis for Congress's action. Having established that theexercise of authority was proper, Marshall concluded that "the government of the Union, though

limited in its power, is supreme within its sphere of action."

After the Civil War, the Supreme Court was more supportive of States' Rights and used the Tenth

Amendment, which provides that the powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved

to the states or to the people, to justify its position. It was not until the 1930s that the Court

shifted its position and invoked the Supremacy Clause to give the federal government broad

national power. The federal government cannot involuntarily be subjected to the laws of any

state.

The Supremacy Clause also requires state legislatures to take into account policies adopted by the

federal government. Two issues arise when State Action is in apparent conflict with federal law.The first is whether the congressional action falls within the powers granted to Congress. If

Congress exceeded its authority, the congressional act is invalid and, despite the Supremacy

Clause, has no priority over state action. The second issue is whether Congress intended its policy

to supersede state policy. Congress often acts without intent to preempt state policy making orwith an intent to preempt state policy on a limited set of issues. Congress may intend state and

federal policies to coexist.

So, with all of this indisputable history on the side of the states and the American people, why is it that so

many of todays politicians and lawyers read the Constitution and Bill of Rights totally backwards in

what appears to be an overt effort to undermine and destroy our Constitutional Republic?

Who is behind these lies?

Ground zero for the massive subversion of the constitution and Bill of Rights is the U.S. Supreme Court,

which attempted to grant itself unbridled powers in decisions likeMarbury vs. Madison, powers which

the Constitution does not grant the court, and the Bill of Rights denies it. Where does the Constitution

grant the judicial branch supreme authority over the other two branches, fifty states and 300 million

citizens, or the authority to grant itself additional powers? The answer is it doesnt

Other misuses of history account for much of the constitutional confusion as well, such as the claims that

Democrat President Andrew Jackson wanted to hang or shoot nullifierswhen in fact, who cares

whether or not Jackson hated states rights or those who would attempt to enforce them? Tough as long

as the Bill of Rights exists, the states and the people have rights, whether the federal government likes it

or not.


7/9


8/9

Because unconstitutional acts of the federal government are VOID on their face, without any force of

law whatsoever, the states and the people are under no moral or legal obligation to recognize, abide by or

enforce such federal acts.

The proper method of dealing with the unconstitutional acts of the federal government at the state level

is a constitutional review panel made up of Representatives of the people within the state, which then

recommends that the state either affirm or reject the federal act within the boundaries of the state.

The North American Law Centerresearched and draftedThe Constitutional State Balance of Powers Act

for state legislatures on this base, drawn directly from the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. In order

for theBalance of Powers Actto be unconstitutional, the Constitution and Bill of Rights would also

have to be unconstitutional, which seems to be the belief of many politicians and lawyers today.

If any state fails to pass the Balance of Powers Act, the people of that state have NO constitutionally

protected rights, NO protections under the Bill of Rights and NO Constitutional Republican form

of government. At that moment, the experts will be correct, the Bill of Rights will be DEAD in

that state.

Is Our Bill of Rights Really DEAD?

Many of todays politicians and lawyers have been trained to subvert the U.S. Constitution and Bill of

Rights, rather than uphold, protect and defend against all enemies. International political powers intent

upon destroying Americas sovereignty and security for the purpose of plundering American resources for

the greater good of the global community have infiltrated both major political parties.

Through theirpolicy think tanks, they create false history and bad law aimed at undermining Americas

Charters of Freedom. Are they right?

Is the Bill of Rights DEAD just because politicians (public servants) say so?

Is it DEAD just because the Supreme Court has attempted to grant itself powers which the Constitution

does not grant to the courts?

Is it DEAD just because partisan think tanks tell you it is?

If the Bill of Rights is DEAD, how is the Constitution still alive?

The Constitution and Bill of Rights are NOT DEAD unless the American people allow them to die

As Founders left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation, a lady asked Dr. Benjamin Franklin,

Well Doctor what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?to which Franklin replied, A republic, if

you can keep it.

Without the U.S. Constitution, the compact between the sovereign states which creates the United States

and its republican federal government, and the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the U.S.
http://northamericanlawcenter.org/http://northamericanlawcenter.org/http://northamericanlawcenter.org/2013-state-balance-of-powers-act/http://northamericanlawcenter.org/2013-state-balance-of-powers-act/http://northamericanlawcenter.org/2013-state-balance-of-powers-act/http://capitolhilloutsider.com/republican-think-tanks-wolves-in-sheeps-clothing/http://capitolhilloutsider.com/republican-think-tanks-wolves-in-sheeps-clothing/http://capitolhilloutsider.com/republican-think-tanks-wolves-in-sheeps-clothing/http://capitolhilloutsider.com/republican-think-tanks-wolves-in-sheeps-clothing/http://northamericanlawcenter.org/2013-state-balance-of-powers-act/http://northamericanlawcenter.org/


9/9

Constitution, there can be no republic, no union of the states and no federal government, which means no

federal authority at all.

The only means of protecting and preserving the Constitutional Republic is to uphold and enforce the

Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.

This is exactly what every American must do in order to keep their republic and the people must remove

from power, any public servant who has demonstrated any opposition to these precious concepts of

freedom and liberty. The people must enforce their rights, or they do not have any rights.

States Rights Position PaperResearched and Prepared by The North American Law Center

www.NorthAmericanLawCenter.org
http://www.northamericanlawcenter.org/http://www.northamericanlawcenter.org/http://www.northamericanlawcenter.org/

Our Bill of Rights is DEAD

Documents

Transcript of Our Bill of Rights is DEAD