Blog

The People’s Power: Jury Nullification

While once considered a very important role in our nation, jury duty is now most commonly viewed as another hindrance in the lives of the American people. I wonder if people knew just how much power they wield as jury members, if that would change? I hope so.

The first Chief Justice, John Jay, stated the following to the first jury in the first Supreme Court trial held in the United States:

It may not be amiss, here, gentlemen, to remind you of the good old rule, that on questions of fact, it is the province of the jury, on questions of law it is the province of the court to decide. But it must be observed that by the same law, which recognizes this reasonable distribution of jurisdiction, you have nevertheless a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact controversy. On this, and on every other occasion, however, we have no doubt you will pay that respect which is due to the opinion of the court; for, as on the one hand, it is presumed that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumable that the courts are the best judges of law. But still, both objects are lawfully within your power of decision (Georgia vs Brailsford 1794). (more…)

The Education Vortex

America touts the best educational system in the world – our federal government, at least, spends a good deal on education ranking second behind Switzerland on money per child– an average of $91,700 per student in the nine years between the ages of 6 and 15 according to “Losing the Brain Race” by Veronique de Rugy  (reason.com March 2011). Unfortunately, our children’s academic success does not correlate with the money that is spent; while we are second in spending, America’s students rank in the mid-range for all major academic areas; de Rugy states, “we spend one-third more per student than Finland, which consistently ranks near the top in science, reading, and math… During the last 40 years, the federal government has spent $1.8 trillion on education, and spending per pupil in the U.S. has tripled in real terms. Government at all levels spent an average of $149,000 on the 13-year education of a high school senior who graduated in 2009, compared to $50,000 (in 2009 dollars) for a 1970 graduate.”

Poor academic showing is not the only consequence of our federally governed education system, however. We have also suffered a great loss of liberty in that schooling is compulsory, curriculum is designed and distributed by publishing companies with deep ties to the government itself, and parents have been left with no say in what is happening to their children, and treated as though they are not qualified to criticize or question the system that is so very flawed. The government would like us to believe that we need more “funding” to fix the broken system. “We have tried spending more money and putting more teachers in classrooms for more than a generation, with no observable improvements to anything except the schools’ bottom lines,” states de Rugy. “If reform is to be defined by something other than the amount of money flushed down the toilet, it is time to reverse the flow of power from the top (administrators, school districts, teachers unions, governments) to the bottom (students, their parents, and taxpayers who want their money spent wisely).”

I couldn’t agree more. While de Rugy suggests “the ‘parent trigger,’ which allows fed-up parents whose children are in a consistently underperforming school to quickly change the school’s leadership.” Under this model, “by signing a petition, parents can force reorganization of a school’s management or conversion into a charter school.” That’s not a bad idea; however, I have a more radical suggestion– we need to hold our federal government to its Constitutional limitations. We must dismantle the Department of Education, end all federal education funding, end standardized testing, nullify all federal law regarding education in America, and allow the states, counties, towns and cities to create education models that best fit the needs of their children. “At the start of the compulsion era there were approximately 135,000 separate citizen school boards, perhaps more, each with seven to nine very solid and very local men and women as board members, watchdogs over the local institution… But local oversight promised nothing but trouble to those who wanted national uniformity…Inside of a century the number of boards was reduced to 15,000. And each decline in the absolute number of school boards made their composition less and less local” (John Taylor Gatto. Weapons of Mass Instruction: A Schoolteacher’s Journey through the Dark World of Compulsory Schooling). Without local oversight and control– without giving the power back to the people– this behemoth that is our national education system will never be reformed, and our children will continue to face academic stagnancy.

Federal Serfdom and Food Freedom

“Lawmaker wants to criminalize enforcing federal food law!”

That’s the headline of a recent KSL article (with an exclamation point added in for emphasis) regarding a bill that will be considered in the upcoming 2012 legislative session. Sponsored by Utah Senator Casey Anderson and originally drafted by the Utah Tenth Amendment Center, this bill is simple: it upholds the Constitution.

It does so by clarifying the difference between intrastate and interstate commerce; the latter is a power delegated to the federal government, but states constitutionally retain the authority over intrastate commerce—items which are exchanged only within the state. This bill does for agriculture what was done for guns in 2010.

(more…)

Federal Justification of Tyranny


photo credit: Poisonist

Arguing before the Superior Court of Massachusetts in 1761, attorney James Otis argued for five hours against the legality of writs of assistance. These writs, which served as general search warrants that did not expire, allowed government officials to search an individual’s person or property at any time, and for any (or no) reason, without having to obtain a specific warrant that described in detail the person, place, or thing to be searched.

Retained by a group of Boston merchants for the case, Otis was well-versed in the abuses of these writs. When speaking before the Court, he related the story of one Mr. Ware, who in retaliation for having been brought before a court on charges of using profanity on the Sabbath, used a writ he had been granted to search through the judge’s home for smuggled goods, as well as the house of the constable who had brought him to the court. Similar abuses of the power to search and seize were quickly becoming commonplace.

Despite his passionate and persuasive speech, Otis lost to the government lawyers. Jeremiah Gridley, representing the customs officials, argued:

(more…)

Utah's Upcoming Opportunity to Uphold the Fourth and Oppose the TSA

Texas has shown leadership in standing up to the TSA and protecting the right of innocent individuals to travel without being molested by a government agent. As was documented in an article on the national TAC site a couple of days ago, the state has unfortunately capitulated as a result of a direct threat from the federal government.

But as that article explains, Texas is not alone, nor is this war against invasive searches and seizures over. In fact, it’s just beginning. We revealed in that article that at least ten states will be considering related legislation. Today we can announce that Utah will be one of those states entering the fray.

Carl Wimmer and one other legislator (unnamed for now, as he hasn’t yet made his involvement public) are reviewing the legislation from the five other states who have worked on this type of bill already, and will be compiling the various ideas and issues into a bill that will be presented for consideration in the 2012 general session next January.

In an assault on the Fourth Amendment protection against searches and seizures without probable cause and a warrant, the TSA is screening innocent passengers in the nation’s airports (and elsewhere), including the one in Salt Lake City. The unjust and unnecessary molestation of men, women, and children who are not reasonably believed to be carrying any contraband nor intending to jeopardize the public’s safety must stop.

Utah will have an opportunity to uphold the Fourth Amendment early next year and protect the individual rights of those who have completely innocent and do not deserve such treatment. Please encourage your representatives to watch for and support this bill.

Governor Herbert to Sign Federalism Law

This past legislative session Rep. Ken Ivory (R – LD47) sponsored legislation based on his ground-breaking effort to teach people to ask, and answer, an all important question; Where’s the Line? This initial legislation places Utah in a powerful position which will make it required, by law, for the State to review federal legislation to insure legislation fits within the constitutional boundaries required. The legislation title is, Federal Law Evaluation and Response (HB-76).

The ceremonial signing will be held Tuesday, May 10 at 3:30 MST in Utah State Capitol Rotunda. Officially signed March 23rd, the ceremonial signing will be a chance for all Utah citizens to witness this important event. The new law will serve as a model for other states to build from as the efforts for restoring the United States’ constitutional line continue to move forward across the country.

This law outlines the mechanics for evaluating all federal legislation and any mandates associated with the legislation. The Constitutional Defense Council will now be required to evaluate and respond to any legislation. Initial evaluation will be done by the newly created Federalism Subcommittee of the Constitutional Defense Council. The Federalism Subcommittee will be chaired by either the Governor or Lt. Governor as well as other elected legislators and members outlined in the bill. This puts the people’s elected officials directly responsible for upholding our U.S. Constitution as their Oath of Office also requires.

Federalism is the unique addition to political science created through the Constitution. It is the standard by which a large, complex compound republic is able to prosper while maintaining liberty and security in a free society. Many are familiar with the concepts of ‘separation of power’ and the idea of ‘checks and balances’ yet many today are not as familiar with federalism. One thing many are hearing more about today is 10th Amendment activism in response to an ever growing federal government. The 10th Amendment is the keystone for securing federalism and is the final amendment in the Bill of Rights.

In his book, Where’s the Line?, Ken Ivory writes, “…the specific reason for establishing a “compound republic” was to divide constitutional powers between the States and federal government so that the States would check and control any unauthorized action by the federal government. “ (p. 6) Alexander Hamilton summed it up during his speech before the New York Ratifying Convention in 1788.

The balance between the National and State governmentsought to be dwelt on with peculiar attention, as it is of the utmost importance. It forms a double security to the people. If one encroaches on their rights they will find a powerful protection in the other. Indeed, they will both be prevented from over passing their constitutional limits by certain rivalship, which will ever subsist between them. (emphasis added)

Both federal and State governments agreed, through ratification, on their roles in maintaining a civil society. The constitutional line has been blurred to a point of near elimination over the past century and a half. Utah is taking the responsibility of federalism serious as the efforts increase to reestablish the line which will help restore the rights of the people and the responsibility for everyone in securing the blessings of liberty.

Utah Goes for the Gold

Earlier this month, we reported on the sound money bill which the Utah legislature passed. Last Friday, Governor Herbert signed this bill into law.

The core component of this new law is the legalized recognition of gold and silver coins (issued by the federal government) as legal currency within the state. They may be used voluntarily by consenting parties, and rather than recognizing the face value of the coin (a horribly distorted metric of the coin’s worth), the market price of the gold or silver content is recognized as its value.

(more…)

Utah Legislature Approves Sound Money

Today, the Utah Senate passed HB317, a bill which will legalize gold and silver as tender within the state of Utah and exempt the exchange (purchase) of such specie from sales and capital gains taxes. Having already passed the House, the bill will now be sent to Governor Herbert to be signed into law, should he so decide.

This type of bill is one that is becoming increasingly popular throughout the country, with multiple states introducing and considering such legislation. Though Utah is now the first state to have a legislature approve of the idea, the sustained momentum of getting other states to review the proposal demonstrates the resiliency of the campaign for sound money. With the U.S. Dollar plummeting in value, this is an issue that will become more popular as time goes on.

As the author of the bill noted in a Fox News article on the subject, this bill will allow Utahns to better prepare for financial turmoil ahead, more easily diversifying into currency with a long history of stability.

This bill, however, is a watered down version of the original submission by the author, Larry Hilton. As we reported previously, the goals of this effort are far more comprehensive and specific. The limited provisions included in this final bill, while certainly welcome, are merely a first step. Expect to see successive legislation in upcoming sessions to expand and broaden the scope of what the legislature passed today.

Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution states emphatically that “no state shall make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts.” Plainly put, this is the goal: to restore the Constitution’s mandate of gold and silver as the only currency accepted in payment of debts by the states. A recent op-ed at tenthamendmentcenter.com notes what the realization of this goal would achieve:

Over time, as residents of the State use both Federal Reserve Notes and silver and gold coins, the fact that the coins hold their value more than Federal Reserve Notes do will lead to a “reverse Gresham’s Law” effect, where good money (gold and silver coins) will drive out bad money (Federal Reserve Notes). As this happens, a cascade of events can begin to occur, including the flow of real wealth toward the State’s treasury, an influx of banking business from outside of the State (as citizens residing in other States carry out their desire to bank with sound money), and an eventual outcry against the use of Federal Reserve Notes for any transactions.

With this vote, Utah has demonstrated leadership among the states on the issue of sound money in taking one step towards the constitutional mandate that has for decades been ignored. Please contact Governor Gary Herbert’s office at 801-538-1000 and ask that he sign this important bill into law.

*******

You can download the Constitutional Tender Act template here:
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/legislation/constitutional-tender/

Track Constitutional Tender legislation in the states at this link:
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/constitutional-tender/

Is Senator Mike Lee a "Radical Tenther?"

If you read Think Progress’s article by Ian Millhiser you may think so.   The article is even listed under “Radical Right-Wing Agenda” to help readers understand how radical Lee’s interpretation is.  Reading the many comments on the article most of the Think Progress readers accept the authors’ view.  What is left out is key to understanding what helped create a country of citizens living more free than any other in history.  Federalism is not radical; it is painted by progressives that way to help mask just how regressive their philosophy of governing truly is.

Before looking deeper into the commentary itself it is important to see just how accurate the author is.  The first indicator the author may not be too concerned with accuracy beyond his views is a simple confusion on the date this video was posted.  Mr. Millhiser begins his attack, and it is an attack, by stating, “Last week, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) posted a lecture on his YouTube channel where he explains in great detail his views on the Constitution.”  His article was posted Jan. 11, 2011.  Clicking the link to the video shows it was posted on Jan. 04, 2010 as he was beginning his campaign for the U.S. Senate in Utah.  Where was the claim of radicalism a year ago?

(more…)

The 2011 Utah Tenth Amendment Agenda

Last night, the Utah Tenth Amendment Center held its first annual legislative briefing, bringing together pro-10th amendment legislators with over 75 leaders and influential members of the various political and patriotic groups throughout the state. The purpose of this meeting was to allow any legislator to present to this group who planned to introduce a bill this session that relates to the 10th amendment.

What follows is a basic summary of each presentation.

(more…)