On 1 December 2010, the Supreme Court of the United States entered the following orders:
KERCHNER, CHARLES, ET AL. V. OBAMA,
PRESIDENT OF THE U.S., ET AL.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
SCHULZ, ROBERT L. V. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM, ET AL
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Both cases were controversies involving subject matter critical to the primary governmental functions and intent of law set forth in the Constitution for the United States.
Kerchner was defending his individual Right to a President that is a natural born citizen.
Schulz was defending his individual Right to a government that does not give or lend public funds to private corporations for definitively private purposes (i.e., the $700 billion AIG and TARP financial bailouts), a power not inherent in the People, much less transferable or granted by the People to the Government.
The Judicial Article III of the Constitution guarantees Kerchner and Schulz that the merits of their cases would be heard by the independent, federal courts (“the judicial Power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution ..”).
However, the lower courts violated Article III, summarily dismissing the cases for “lack of standing,” on the (erroneous) ground that because the injuries to Kerchner and Schulz were no different from the injuries suffered by the rest of the people in the country, neither Schulz nor Kerchner’s Petitions to cure constitutional torts could proceed. By dismissing the cases on “lack of standing”, the courts essentially suggest that Kerchner and Schulz should have directed their Grievances to Congress – as if the issues raised were political questions and America was a pure democracy with rights granted by the will of the majority, rather than a Republic with unalienable, individual, Natural Rights, guaranteed by written Constitutions, enforceable through an independent Judiciary.
Kerchner and Schulz had Petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States to overrule and reverse the “no standing” rulings of the lower courts and send the cases back to the lower courts for a hearing on the merits of the constitutional challenges. In denying both Petitions for Certiorari and avoiding a judicial examination of the merits for no other discernable reason than political eagerness, the Supreme Court added a ruthless sneer to the Grievances.
About all that can be said about the Kerchner and Schulz cases is we can add “presidential eligibility” and “corporate welfare” to the dung heap of other desecrations of our sacred Charters of Freedom, including but by no means limited to violations of the war, money, taxes, privacy, property, immigration, petition and sovereignty clauses — all of which have been the subject of repeated Petitions and court challenges that have been either ignored by government officials or tersely dismissed by abuses of one judicial doctrine or another.
Unfortunately, this leaves us – the People – with but one irrefutable conclusion: the Constitution is NOT now serving any meaningful purpose. The rule of law has been replaced by the rule of man and whim. The Constitution has become a mere menu of words, phrases and ideas which the government may choose to define or ignore at its sole will and discretion.
The way the system is working is in sharp contrast to the way it was designed to work. Ignoring Article V’s prescriptions for orderly change, our elected and appointed officials are now doing whatever they think best, literally unrestrained by either the written words of the Law itself or the intent behind those words – i.e., the set of principles, prohibitions and mandates proclaimed to govern them – the Constitution for the United States, the Supreme Law of the Land.
Rather than three independent, co-equal branches of a highly-limited federal Government, each designed to be a check and balance on the other two, keeping them in their constitutional places, with the People possessing the ultimate Power, we now suffer the branches cooperating in decisions to deny the People their creator-endowed, unalienable Rights to life, Liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.
The following question is for those among us who know that the Constitution is a set of principles to govern the government and is all that stands between the People and oppression, who know what the Constitution has to say about such current events as war, money, taxes, privacy, property, illegal immigration, and sovereignty.
What should a free People do when faced with the realization that their Constitution is being dishonored and disobeyed by their elected officials and judges, and that their creator-endowed Rights have been whittled away by elected servants who are taking over the house that the Founding Fathers designed “with reliance upon Divine Providence”?
We The People Foundation wants to hold a Liberty Summit in January for an open discussion with opinion leaders and others passionate about the Constitution about how to restore constitutional governance. It is hoped the Summit results in a plan of action agreeable to all.
To learn more, visit We the People Foundation webiste.