Union Frameworks: Recent Episodes
Bob Kalk
The Union Frameworks series is brought to you by Ascension University’s School of Statesmanship. Visit www.GuestLecturers.org for additional resources. There you will find inspirational overviews for edification together with tightly crafted instructional assets advancing government of, by, and for the people on a strife torn world.
If one would be required to sign an Informed Consent document to have a mole removed, howcould the Consent of the Governed be legally undermined through the deceptive practices ofprevaricating politicians that routinely target the voting public with misleading statements?The abandonment of principle that has led to its surreptitious betrayal with respect to theDoctrine of Original Intention makes the ‘originalist’ Justices look like walking contradictions.Their efforts, to undermine government of, by, and for the people, are obvious to anyone whovalues objective satisfaction over subjective gratification. In the United States of America the Supreme Court represents what has been described as […]
With its Decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court hasboth enabled and facilitated clear Deprivations of Rights under the Color of Law. The ThirteenthAmendment, in Section 1 is unambiguous with the statement “Neither slavery nor involuntaryservitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Title 18 of The United States Code in Chapter 77 at §1581 further underscores the Supremefolly with respect to forced labor. That statute reads: “Whoever holds or returns any person to a condition of […]
George Washington, in his Farewell Address, said: “Political parties may now and then answerpopular ends, but they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines,by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of thepeople and to usurp for themselves the reins of government”. The dark money sophistries that support judicial nominations, confirmations, andfeatherbedded accommodations appear to dovetail precisely with President Washington’sprophetic wisdom. The Court has cloaked itself with an absolute judicial immunity that has nofoundation within the Constitution of the United States. It is, rather, a doctrine derived from […]
In the Majority Supreme Court Opinion on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v.Bruen, Justice Thomas wrote “. . . when it comes to interpreting the Constitution, not all historyis created equal. Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood tohave when the people adopted them.” Justice Breyer, in his Dissenting Opinion, recalled points he raised earlier in the Heller casewherein he proposed weighing “the interests protected by the Second Amendment on one sideand the governmental public-safety concerns on the other.”
Melville W. Fuller was the first Chief Justice to lobby Congress. He successfully advocated forthe adoption of the Circuit Courts of Appeals Act of 1891. It established appellate courts,which reduced the Supreme Court’s backlog and allowed it to decide cases in a more timelymanner. In 1893, President Grover Cleveland offered to appoint Fuller to be Secretary of State.He declined, contending that accepting a political appointment would harm the SupremeCourt’s reputation for impartiality.
Abraham Lincoln steadfastly believed that the Constitution should be interpreted in a mannerthat is faithful to its purposes. Today, the legacy of Lincoln stands as an inspiring exampleagainst the pernicious sophistries of those who seek to undermine what John Wycliffedescribed in the Preface to his translation of the Latin Vulgate into Middle English. He wrote:“The Bible is for government of, by and for the people.” Lincoln later expressed the hope,shared by all people of authentic good will, that such an evolved form of government “shall notperish from the earth.”
“Obviously people can say what they want. And they’re certainly free to criticize theSupreme Court. And if they want to say that its legitimacy is in question they’re free todo so but I don’t understand the connection between opinions that people disagreewith and the legitimacy of the Court.” John Roberts, Chief Justice of the United States SupremeCourt The Declaration of Independence incorporated a doctrine first articulated as “the consent ofthe governed” by John Duns Scotus in his Lectura and Ordinatio of the 1290s. That phrasing,adopted unanimously by the 56 delegates to the Second Continental Congress on July the 4thin 1776, […]
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his first speech on court capture. Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his second floor speech on court capture and dark money, in his new series. Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his third speech on the special-interest scheme to capture the Supreme Court. Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his fourth speech on court capture. Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his fifth Scheme speech on the Federalist Society Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his sixth Scheme speech on the Judicial Crisis Network Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his seventh floor speech on court capture and dark money. Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his eighth floor speech on court capture and dark money. Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivers his ninth speech on the Scheme to capture the Supreme Court. Watch the Video
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), delivered the tenth in a series of speeches titled, “The Scheme,” exposing the scheme by right-wing donor interests to capture the U.S. Supreme Court and achieve through the Court’s power what they cannot through other branches of government. This speech discussed the overlap between the Scheme to capture the Court and … Continue reading