Author - Anonymous bequeathed to Felicia McCaw to be published for my Aunt Daisy Jackson and gifted to myself her daughter and love and light in her eye.
Shadows of heartbreak follow behind
Shadows of sadness lurk in my mind
Shadows of grief hide deep and within
Shadows of dreams tossed to the wind
**********
I live alone
It hasn't always been that way
It's nice sometimes to open up the heart a little
and let some hurt come in
It proves you're still alive
I'm not sure what it means
Why we cannot shake the old loves from our minds
It must be that we build on memory and make them more than what they were
And make them more than what they were
And is the manufacture just a safe device for closing up the wall?
I do remember
the only fuzzy circumstance is sometimes where-and-how
Why, I know
It happens just because we need to want and to be wanted too
When love is here or gone
To lie down in the darkness and listen to the warm
****************
I should not dare to leave my friend
Because if he should die
While I was gone and I too late
Should reach the Heart that wanted me
If I should disappoint the eyes
That hunted so to see
And could not bear to shut until
They noticed me
If I should stab the patient faith
So sure I’ld come
It listening went to sleep
Telling my tardy name
My heart would wish it broke before
Since breaking then
Were useless as next morning’s sun
Where midnight frosts had lain
****************
Try and Catch the Wind
In the chilly hours and minutes of uncertainty
I want to be in the warm of your loving mind
To feel you all around me and to take your hand along the sand
Oh but I may as well try and catch the wind
When sunshine hails the skies
I want to hide awhile behind your smile
And everywhere I’ld look your eyes I’ld find
For me to love you now would be the sweetest thing
Would make me sing
Oh but I may as well try and catch the wind
When rain has hung the trees with tears
I want you near to kill my fears
To help me to leave all my blues behind
But standing in your heart is where
I want to be and long to be
Oh but I may as well try and catch the wind
****************
A Decade
When you came, you were like rich wine and honey
And the taste of you burnt my mouth with sweetness
Now you are like morning bread smooth and pleasant
I hardly taste you at all for I know your savor
But I am completely nourished
Today there is sunlight caressing the dew
Today clouds go chasing all over the blue
Today echo answers the cry of the dove
Today there is laughter and singing and love
That is the true season of love
When we believe that we alone
Can love, that no one could ever
Have love so before us and
That no one will love in the
Same way after us
****************
Imagine
Imagine tears
A smile wide and a year deep
Imagine a chain of sorrow
Linking past with present
Present with future
Imagine no one to turn to
Imagine a never ending search for love
And a God that may not be
Imagine all the wonderment and confusion
Imagine me
************
Little girl grown
Paining
Like a woman
Free but alone
Painting
Her desires
On a whim
Detached
From her past
The future is dim
Unattached
And uninspired
Rusty wagon wheel
By the creek
Gazing and dazed
To feel
So weak
So young
And so tired
*****
If loneliness were just my little rag doll
And understanding went as far as
Button eyes can see
Then maybe I’ld accept my solitude
And like a little raggedy head
I’d smile on childishly
But thoughts that fill my head
Are not of cotton
Beneath my skin
I’m as real as I can be
******
I know you’re gone, but in a way you still
Rest by my side. For since that day we kissed,
Like passing clouds, I’ve held you near
To chill the fiery fires and hush the deathly hiss
I cannot bear to hear
The love that grew enlightened me
Caressed and smooth my tear streaked eyes
And stroked my cheek in kindness
You are all I’ve loved in happiness
And years will not forget your vision through the haze
Like life itself the struggle has been long within me
Wanting more than just past days gone by
But someday when another song of joy rings clear
I’ll thrill to our last touch remembering and loving you so much
************
You're strong and young
The world is yours
Your heart is free
But I'm not so
I can't excape
My destiny
To grow attached
To learn to care
But that's just me
And I want you
More than any
Rhyme could ever say
In open woods
you never fear
Which path to take
The world intrudes
I seek confinement
Like the lake
I know my boundaries
Where to deep
And when to wake
And I need you
More than any
Rhyme could ever say
By being you
You've shown me how
To really see
My heart and mind
Now love and think
In harmony
I've peace of mind
But still my love
Beats frantically
And I love you
More than any
Rhyme could ever say
********
I sought your wisdom, strength and warmth in hopes
That someday soon the mysteries would cease
To strike a fearful note, constraining ropes
Would form a ladder out of now to peace of mind
But in my search I found that I was looking through a mirror
All I hold to be my pain is me
In search of whys that have no answers
Living things are lovely things
And lovely things must die
Clouds are not the cheeks of angel you know they're only clouds
Friendly sometimes but you can never be sure
If I hand longer arms
I'd push the clouds away or make them hang above the water came
where else
But I'm just a man who needs and wants
Mostly things he'll never have
Looking for that thing that's hardest to find
I've been going a long time now
Along the way I've learned some things
You have to make the good times yourself
Take the little times and make them into big times
And save the times are all right
For the ones that aren't so good
I've never been able to push the clouds away myself help me
***************************************************************
I have loved you in so many ways in crowds or all alone
When you were away and I imagine others watching you in the street
or worse you in other people’s arms
I have seen the march of beach birds and loved you
I have lent myself to summer sun and loved you and seeing naked trees
Raising my collar to the wind and counting minutes till chartered hours were there I have loved you
The questions were asked the answers learned at love’s expense I’ve promised myself
I will not ask where you have been tonight I’ll only say hello and hope
I know a tree beyond the bend ahead that drags its branches in the water beneath it there is yellow grass and colored stones
If you can shake your new friends from your mind we’ll go down along the water’s edge and give ourselves another chance
Think about the squirrels darting in the fallen leaves, consider the changing clouds, the crickets are still singing in the grass think of how they’ll sound when Christmas comes again
This is daylight turn and face me face-to-face we’ll go naked in the afternoon and then you’ll see I’m only me were you expecting something more
I taste like you remember because I’ve been with you so long because we are each other as we are ourself all I have to fight is what I’ve been for you before
All the taxi horns have sounded their retreat the wind is down to nothing but a whisper in the street
Now as you lie sleeping I’ll take a moment just to tell you all the things I never sway when you’re awake
Thank you for the raspberries this morning and thank you for orange marmalade and last night let me say when you might have gone away thank you very much because you stayed
Thank you for the sun you brought this morning even though the sky was full of clouds and thank you for the way you held me yesterday and steered me through the noisy Paris crowds
I can’t look ahead to the future and I’m too old to run home to the past so now while you sleep on beside me I’ll do what I can to make this moment last
Thank you for another special morning and thank you for an even better day and thank you in advance if there’s even half a chance you’ll stay one more morning one more day
******************************8
Monday, April 10, 2017
Sunday, April 9, 2017
A Winter Day (Adults Only)
A simpering and primping day began
As the window turned inside out
A maid of allure stood in full view with tits in hands of supplication
Saying coyly who will have my strawberries ripe
A man of slim young smiled with glee lust
I will I will and climbed the sill
Grabbing her fierce he plundered her full sail and died in heaven sweet
By
Felicia McCaw
As the window turned inside out
A maid of allure stood in full view with tits in hands of supplication
Saying coyly who will have my strawberries ripe
A man of slim young smiled with glee lust
I will I will and climbed the sill
Grabbing her fierce he plundered her full sail and died in heaven sweet
By
Felicia McCaw
Camilla the Headstrong
I will have my way no matter what who say
Even though the rings rang merrily and play
I will have my say
Thoughts twinkling fast and go around and dare the day
I will have my play
Unusual as the day revolves a measure of a beat becomes a melody of today
I will have my way
I will have my say
Tomorrow will look and say always
By
Felicia McCaw
Even though the rings rang merrily and play
I will have my say
Thoughts twinkling fast and go around and dare the day
I will have my play
Unusual as the day revolves a measure of a beat becomes a melody of today
I will have my way
I will have my say
Tomorrow will look and say always
By
Felicia McCaw
Sunday, April 2, 2017
President Donald Trump and Mr. Barack Obama
April 2, 2017
Dear President Donald Trump, Mr. Barack Obama and world
Subject: Invasionary Probe equipped with camera with devised ultra violet light
Hello and good day. During the contemplation and my study in the class Criminal Justice 320 it way my pleasure to sit in this class and study strategic purpose of Criminal Investigation.
In the Book Criminal Investigation in the section that investigates Death and all its mystery and history I found the examination of wounds as to determining the possibility of weapons that could have been used and the historical date or age of wounds.
Since rape is a very particular and delicate investigations my thoughts on this subject is that the ultra violet light that is used in determination and examination of scars can be used with an internal probe and camera to take pictures of the womb and vaginal opening and canal. My purpose in proposing this is that for proving statutory rape or regular rape this can be beneficial in determining whether the rape was done recently or years previous. As known and reflected by studies that statutory rape is an overwhelming factor that is overlooked and flagrantly ignored and not reported due to fear and intimidation due to underage and not having protection. Therefore, if a person came forward at more favorable time the scarage would still be there to help support the assertion that rape was done but not reported due to fear. Consequently, this probe would be a support and deterrent to those who are telling the truth and those who are not.
Further, if the rape was done years ago this would reveal the scarage in the womb as being healed with smooth texture at origin with rough covering on top. If the wound or scar is recent the scarage would be superficial with covering and uneven texture beneath. Due to the nature of rape it is a predominant fact that fear and accusation are reasons that some people don’t come forth to report an unwanted internal intrusion. Further as some regard rape as a game this introspected thought would hinder the pretense, lies and games that are attributed to “play rape”.
Lastly, the whole nature of this change is to prove invasionary force was used and was not a consensual act.
Thank you.
Felicia McCaw
I appreciate your reading and giving my idea a chance…I am a student at Strayer University.
Dear President Donald Trump, Mr. Barack Obama and world
Subject: Invasionary Probe equipped with camera with devised ultra violet light
Hello and good day. During the contemplation and my study in the class Criminal Justice 320 it way my pleasure to sit in this class and study strategic purpose of Criminal Investigation.
In the Book Criminal Investigation in the section that investigates Death and all its mystery and history I found the examination of wounds as to determining the possibility of weapons that could have been used and the historical date or age of wounds.
Since rape is a very particular and delicate investigations my thoughts on this subject is that the ultra violet light that is used in determination and examination of scars can be used with an internal probe and camera to take pictures of the womb and vaginal opening and canal. My purpose in proposing this is that for proving statutory rape or regular rape this can be beneficial in determining whether the rape was done recently or years previous. As known and reflected by studies that statutory rape is an overwhelming factor that is overlooked and flagrantly ignored and not reported due to fear and intimidation due to underage and not having protection. Therefore, if a person came forward at more favorable time the scarage would still be there to help support the assertion that rape was done but not reported due to fear. Consequently, this probe would be a support and deterrent to those who are telling the truth and those who are not.
Further, if the rape was done years ago this would reveal the scarage in the womb as being healed with smooth texture at origin with rough covering on top. If the wound or scar is recent the scarage would be superficial with covering and uneven texture beneath. Due to the nature of rape it is a predominant fact that fear and accusation are reasons that some people don’t come forth to report an unwanted internal intrusion. Further as some regard rape as a game this introspected thought would hinder the pretense, lies and games that are attributed to “play rape”.
Lastly, the whole nature of this change is to prove invasionary force was used and was not a consensual act.
Thank you.
Felicia McCaw
I appreciate your reading and giving my idea a chance…I am a student at Strayer University.
Sunday, March 19, 2017
SOC205 - CASE TWO - I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
CASE TWO
1
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
Strayer University
Felicia McCaw
Professor Clinton Gortney
SOC205
Online Winter 2017
March 1, 2017
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
2
In salutation to the American Flag and the people and our glorious nation I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag of this country that stands as a united force and face against the invasion of terrorism and abject misery inflicted upon all who seek sanctuary in this nation of right. Challenged repeatedly as being unconstitutional and a violation of rights the Pledge of Allegiance stills stands for the fidelity and trust placed rigidly in the hands of the protectors of this country America. Being misconstrued as blind allegiance to the United States it stands to reason that without faith in their mother nation or offspring the facilitory right to uphold the legal sanctions, legal structure of the judicial system, societal structure and rights, social norms and inherent societal functions of alertness would cause the erosion of a patriot and national active stance to serve as a true American who loves the very essence of freedom, liberty and peace for all.
Arguments facing the Pledge of Allegiance encompass the following dissents that support the thought that the language of the pledge violates the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, that the nature of the pledge causes ethical conflict and last that it exemplifies tenants of radical nationalism and fascist idolatry. Further the active use of the phrase of “Under God” is also a supposed hindering and controlling act that causes an infringement of free choice and violation of the First Amendment. As such the oath taken every day is not a fascist act but a realization that it reiterates the devotion of people true to the protection of liberty, freedom, free speech and choice of stance against an invading force that would nullify, void and cancel a free way to life and all its true inherency to be free to evolve a country forward with loyalty and devotion and thankfulness of a country that protects and loves it own.
The supposed thought that the phrase “Under God” is a prevalent and malicious violation of the Establishment Clause when the Flag Code was amended in 1954, when John E.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
3
Thompson, J.D., a graduate of Harvard Law School made distinction that the purpose was to make clarity of a country distinct from communism and atheism and affirm the United States as a country of religion and to further infuse the children with the belief of God and under the protection of God.
As such the rights of Congress to change, modify and adopt renditions, changes are permissive due to the evolve nature of state and government. In reflection, no violation of the Establishment Clause has been adhered to but the act of forethought to bind a unique assortment of races to stand as one against any invasionary force and also benefit the nature of a moral structure by the addition of a religious base to effectively retain the respect, dignity, chastity and base to parlay and trade on equal standing as a new country still in the growing state with other countries of older.
The ethical purpose of the Pledge of Allegiance causes differing interpretations of acceptance in a country rout with structural layers of discrimination, prejudice and oppressions that fulfills a purpose for one and not all. As a structuralized country that provides an ethical point the conclusionary analysis would always be for all races in its inclusiveness. As all are factors of consideration and backers, builders that evolve a nation forward. In consequence, it is not the Pledge of Allegiance but the active phraseology that is being challenged and the dismissive rights of a people oppressed, stifled, muffled, hushed and intimidated and as its inherentory rights are challenged also are rights to have progeny. Even if the Pledge of Allegiance was denied, cancelled still the active oppression, suppression of a people’s quest for freedom would be denied as well as the educational latitude and allowance for growth, expansion, commerce and free law.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
4
Therefore, in all of its states of equity the ethical challenges are mute, void due to the heavy influence of a socialized, internal bias of a country still holding unto the values of superiority and remarkably hate of a race that contributes but is encouraged to be exemplified as a “horror in the night”.
The ethical concern is primarily interwoven with the prevalent challenge of inequality and socialized principles of those viewed as wrong even though right as a consistent pattern of suppression and oppression. Further any active participation of patriotnism is seen unequivocally as a privilege to the free, the proud and the brave but not of a color and race that was held in bondage but still is bound by chains of invisibility. Therefore, the act of nationalism is seen in a hostile facility to disclose the rendering of a no, non-acceptance to those who are free with will of permit as those who are unasked. Once again, the ethical play raises flags of question who is a patriot those of acceptance of the dominant race in this culture or those who actively love a country by migration. A fallacy is not the ethical concern but the annihilation of a race and its supposed unequaled iniquities viewed as socialized inequalities and supposed inability that is rendered by hate, jealousy, spite, venom and distaste. In consequence, the overt inclusion of all races to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance shows not a impairing of nationalism but indeed a mean subtle intent to dislocate, irradiate and destroy a race of unwant.
These revelations are heavily indicated by dual purpose of justice that says “for all” but revolve to differing states when addressing minority issues by slights, alienation and change of outlook by known perception and deceit. Therefore, the case of extreme nationalism becomes a moot issue with no standing or prevalency because it is geared toward one race and not others, which support the theory of leading violence, social ostracism and dismissals of supposed guaranteed inalienable rights for American citizens.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
5
But the question comes who is American now and who is the active benefactor in a country of “who” since this country is a melting pot of diverse cultures, differing languages, religions, ethnicities this too stands to question who is “America” when the chosen language is questioned in the Pledge of Allegiance but the purpose is what? Mockery? Sardonic amusement or an inner ploy to teach hate, disallowance, innate resentment, looks and thoughts of nature of despisement. But as a reflection free thought is actively encouraged, unhindered and is a constitutional right as well as resentment of supposed deflections that are felt detrimental to a country of equal and free with the primary language of English spoken.
As in the case of Massachusetts Supreme Court the Pledge of Allegiance does not act as a facilitator to discriminate against non-religious (Case – Jane Doe vs. Action-Boxborough Regional School District) it still stands as an act of voluntary but a patriotic act. The legal history reflects the pledge as first appearing in 1892, codified in 1942 with “Under God” added in 1954. As a support the Jane Doe case became a parallel when it assisted in the ruling of the 2004 Elk Grove United States School District vs. Newdow that had a similar challenge and query.
The active ingredient in these cases seem to lead to assertions of “they felt included”, “stigmatized”, “marginalized”, “a lack of belonging”, “supposed atheist state”, and since no adverse treatment was received the grounds for complaint were found insufficient, null and void do the act being voluntary. Therefore, since the pledge is not an active dictatorship to religion it does not lead to the fecundity of the act of religion and is once again a challenge and complaint of moot.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
6
Any active charge against constitutional rights are prevalently a charge of the Magna Carta which is the founding block of the Constitution in all its ancestral form and acts of truth, honor, legality, fairness and righteousness for the acts of free man and woman in all stages of livelihood. Active in clauses 1, 27, 34, 38, 39, 40, 42, 54, 61 and 63.
These clauses are evident in each word and writing of the Constitution and protect each and every person in this country from the effects of force, control and dictatorship and denies the act of a totalitarian government. As in the Magna Carta, Martin Luther’s King, Jr.’s speech “I Have a Dream” further highlights and delineates that the negro is still not free but is bound by invisible chains of structuralized oppression and suppression. A crippling state of triumph the mockery hails and sings they are not free by the power act of segregation, educational denial and exile in the country of America. In betrayal of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence the promissory note is looked upon as “what” when it comes to black people but an inalienable right of liberty to all others of differing races with all amenities provided.
The active state of pledging to a country that is “hate” becomes a heartrending state and question of “why” am I not a heir to the promise and right. This act of gradualism is not indeed a happening for the fear of protest is running rampant and thrills the soul to continue, to walk, and protest the version of vision a person of color propelled by the act of socialization, deprivation and mockery. As such the active march of democracy still holds it seductive sway and the promise of a better tomorrow. As the quick sands gather fast, dear and deadly so does the right to fair justice begin to pall as the level of bigotry and hatred spirals out of control and the denial of the fair right to compete on all grounds from basic to intellectual challenge to parlay and exchange. Again 1963, is not an end but a beginning for the coming of judgment begins from this instance when the state of dire retroversion begins its evil song of hate and the fight begins
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
7
for the rights of all to stand for the promise to challenge, query, pause and reflect the state of pledging allegiance to a country that must be fair with competition or the closure of stagnation, limitation, death and foreign dominancy will reign supreme. For indeed the bitter is the sweet and wine of provocation and thought with acts of peace, non-violence and to not incline toward the distrust of all white people for the destiny of two is aligned as the destiny of one. I too have a dream that the Pledge of Allegiance will stand “Tall” for all races for a patriot is a servant and worthy is that servant of his or her country to stand firm and hard against an evil foul to air and earth. Let freedom ring to think, evolve, create and unite.
As in Lincoln’s House Divided Speech a house turned against each other cannot stand, cannot unite, cannot defend, cannot communicate, cannot change, cannot evolve, cannot be. Those against country and man are the treason of the foul and the nature of this country of free enterprise, life and liberty and joy to be within. Understanding the hierarchy tree of history is in its own act a challenge and facilitator to end some of the ramifications of the lingering effects of slavery and consequential interactive purpose of now and denial of rights in any purpose of change. For indeed, Squatter Sovereignty is indeed a mockery when a man is a man and a woman is a woman and all are deemed equal and therefore the affects of slavery and lingering effects become a living force and continuous joke.
As a right, give me liberty or give me death for a life of servitude or slavery is an injustice and regression to an era of horrendous thought and action. Therefore, the inclusion of God and servitude to him became a merciful plead and endeavor to allow the freedom to debate and challenge acts considered at the height of hypocrisy and regressional latitude. The truth whether hurtful or brutal compels a man or woman to act with reason against conflictions to freedom with no standard of yoke placed upon them. For a man or woman of intellect is
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
8
therefore now considered a beast (an ape) of inability to vocalize thought, reason with mind through the usage of pen and pencil of the written and verbal or that he or she indeed is personalification of all that is human but is being treated thus as a residue of slavery and intentional conditioning of a dysfunctional society. For the truth whether partial or all is never negligible but a tangible sword against the unrighteous, deceitful and destroyers of society past is the preventer of folly in present and future even as the insidious curls with malevolency toward the right to protest a wrong still parallel to the legal structure and right to petition, pledge of allegiance and fight an injustice.
Subjugation of a person(s) is not ideal or allocator of support of any constitutional plan and that the act of truth is still the sword of destruction for those who compromise the few, the proud and the brave. For counter to freedom is slavery and that in itself is a factor of defeat but training and educating of all is a right of invoked and not a deflector of ill but a prevailing right of the Declaration of Independence that allows the measure of all for woman, man and child.
That as facilitates the equality of all men (women and children) as endowed by their creation with inalienable rights to live, freedom, prosper, health, happiness and rights of all irregardless of station in life whether impoverish or rich. Just as men are the societal holds, women are the holders as well and in that form they are equated with free choice equitable thought, reason, prudence, safety, freedom of not being chattel and interdisciplinary factors to facilitate happiness and fairness. Therefore, they (he and she) have greeted the Assent of Laws to be blood and hereditary factors of right, evolution and continuance.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
9
As such the need to object is evidential cause for equal measure whether male or female. As guaranteed the lodging of acts to render a person powerless amongst the multitudes is prevented by this act of right (Declaration of Independence) and the Constitution of the United States that prevents a threshold of conspiracy to level and challenge the blood, active nervous system and skeletal framework for this country. As stated in the Monroe Doctrine the rights established have been carved with the deaths of many, blood of millions that propelled the defense of whether one or all and our own pervades the senses and fulfill the wisdom to know a season of change and menace that attacks an entirety and not just a single or double entity and as such it repeals the peace and safety previously granted. Therefore, the active state of oppression surges clear with threat of maim, mental, psychological and physicality.
In consequence, the Monroe Doctrine supports the right to independence and to be de facto as the government to assist in the cultivation of friendly relations, preservation of firm policy and claim of power and its right to pursue same course.
Another factor that helps retain the Pledge of Allegiance is the Bill or Rights with later amendments. The subsequent rights are active under the First Amendment, Amendment 6, 7, and 9, 14 and 15. These amendments effectively state and support the freedom of speech, or press and right of people to peacefully assemble, right to a fair and objective trial, rights in a civil case, rights retained by the people and its protection to not deny or disparage others by the people, whether of the Black nation or minority and right to Black suffrage and its state of exclusiveness in the Pledge of Allegiance and subsequent refusal of acknowledgment of rights of say whether in written form or verbal annotations.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
10
Conclusively, the American’s Creed voices the right and will of the people to act as one, be one and for the people irregardless of ill and actively retain democracy in a republic, which is a sovereign nation of many sovereign states and therefore a perfect union that is one and inseparable which is based upon the principles of freedom, equality, justice and humanity for which all patriots have died for and live for.
As George W. Harkins addressal to the American People that knowing and believing a crisis is at stake and even though the sympathy is for a distressed country we are was and now hedged by two evils, the choice that cost the least vs. the choice that should have ranged and clamored dear to heart. Protection of the legislature and ability to legislate and that which is ours. Therefore, could a mountain of prejudice be removed once justice has been obstructed, prevented and the right of freedom condemned and tainted by voices of ill-repute that prevents a true allocation that parallel and triumphs the truth. Oppression is as it is a trickery to undermine a race’s value in the land of promised and the acts are voluntary and not racially motivated but concealed with racial hate carving its own spear in back and spine. For deceit and hate comes to a protester who clamors for justice as the beating of his or her own heart and a choice to be seen, heard and acknowledged for a measure of peace for a people injured, deceitfully used, lied upon and a need for respite and solitary.
As Daniel Webster’s Seventh of March Speech prevails upon the need for continuous propriety, dignity and its own collective high responsibilities this also serves as facilitator to free choice and respective regard of a body that represents this country it supports the confidence and administering of wise, moderate patriotic confidence to lead the way safely and retain the legal structure and that the denial of agitations cannot be done and that dangers to home, land and
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
11
person exist as well as threat to the justice system. As with the East, the North and South this has caused profound inclarities but affective to internal state is progressively stabilizing but still the lurk of hate and malice is lingering far and strong.
Duty as fidelity is the conclusion to follow the act of tomorrow, renders the judgment and actions of the future and conclusively affect reason, thought, security and ability to protest. Now, the Economic Bill of Rights entail the measure of strategic planning for winning peace and establishment of higher living which would consist of support for a nation continuously under fire and the people therein. In reflection, as thought and theories chase each other so does the question of our founding fathers’ illustrious words of treatise, structural and desire for continuing liberty and freedom. These great thoughts indeed parallel the wish for the people not as a proposal but a challenge to submerse the thoughts of a heretic that a Black man or woman is too primal to escalate a chain of high thought and progress. The acts of increase is progenious to support, appreciation, love and fidelity and as such a state of content cannot be allowed for like time and tomorrow the clock continues and need to change and evolve the people to become self-maintaining, supportive, self-facilitating exists with clear discernment. Therefore, stagnation cannot be cloaked as friend but as a foe to even the most least educated.
Consequently, these rights spell strength, political rights which include free speech without repudiation and ill will, free press, free to worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches, threat of harm and seizures. As thus the right to life and liberty is our blood and is invoked in all who are patriots who appear in any race with no color restrictions or discrimination learned or taught. Further the Economic Bill of Rights guarantees the right to a good education and ability to survive, support and maintain self, husband and family. Further the realization of these rights spell security and right against the odds of injustice.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
12
Lastly, ask not what your country can do for you but believe that a victory in itself is a conclusive stage of mutual interaction that facilitates a give and take scenario. The Lord God has been good and benevolent in his blessing and teaching of patience and await for all battles are his that overcome the small against those of more power and multitudes of many. As with the revolution, the thought that prevail is to be free and was and is uppermost in all thoughts of man, woman and child. As with tempered steel we bend but we arise and fight on.
As a true patriot we are the protectors of those small, young, old and we forget not God’s promise of life with health and abundancy and the fairness of decision by trial, mediation and verdict. Also, that the securing of liberty has costs and those that stand on stance of ill will, will be fought, protested and negotiated fairly as in the case of Elk Grove Unified School District vs. Newdow.
In relation to the case submitted to the Supreme Court for consideration of petition with the complaint of violation of constitutional rights and infringement of the act. In effect Newdow gave challenge as to the preposition of the school transferring and teaching his daughter to submit to reciting the Pledge of Allegiance because of referral and reference to “Under God” since he is an atheist and does not believe in God.
Also, in this case was Sandra Banning (Mother) who filed an inter alia to intervene and have the case dismissed. But as stands the finding concludes that her sole parental rights does not hinder or prevent his challenge or objection and her restrictive wish to not have her daughter as a party to the case. Further holding that he has the right to instill his belief and wish to her in regard to religion.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
13
But based on the Family’s Court Newdow does not have authority to act upon her behalf as either as a next friend or as a parental decider. As decided by the Ninth Circuit, the decision by the Supreme Court was reversed and allowed the infringement of rights pertaining to exposure to any religious content which was done by certiorari to hear additional plea.
The case or lawsuit was originally filed as Newdow vs. Unites Congress, Elk Grove Unified School, et al in 2000. In 2002, the ruling of the United State Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit relayed that the wording in itself “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance serves as an endorsement for religion and thereby violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution. In further judgment, in the year of 2004 the Supreme held that Michael Newdow did not have the right to act as a noncustodial parent nor does he have the standing to bring a suit on behalf of his daughter.
In the year of 2005, a case was appealed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California enjoining the school district defendants from continuing the practice of leading children in pledging allegiance to “One Nation Under God”. Case was later appealed to the Ninth Circuit under Newdow v Carey and was reversed.
Anything levied against the Constitution is presented as a challenge as to the legitimacy of an action that is thought to violate rights. Therefore, presentation has to be submitted to the Federal level and since only Congress can make said determination the right of levy can only be appealed to the United States Congress. If in fact the act is satisfactorily proven as an infringement on civil rights and as a violation of right to not be exhibited to religion or the matter of practicing religion then this in turn supports the act of dismissal of need to be exposed to said offending act or matter then it parallels and confirm true that violation has occurred. But in the
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
14
matter of this case, the act of levy was the phrasing of the Pledging of Allegiance with the words “Under God” being the offensive since the parent is an atheist and objected to the conveying of any religious matter to his daughter and exposure to a belief dissimilar to his own.
The first attempt was to the Supreme Court of the United States which was denied by the Magistrate Judge who deemed and judged that there was no violation of constitutional rights and judgment was subsequently supported by District Court and dismissed. As a further appeal a writ of certiorari was made to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit who overturned the judgment with affirmation that a violation of rights had occurred and stood in a violation of the Establishment Clause and further held due to controversy of parental rights that he was a noncustodial parent, under Article III standing has reservitory rights to challenge the acts of exposure to religion because of his view even if they prove contradictory to hers as such the right to further redress for an alleged injury to his own parental interest was granted.
The active challenge of suit on the basis of next friend was disallowed because of his lack of prudential standing and his position as noncustodial parent vs. Sandra Banning as custodial parent and guardian. Therefore, he has standing but not the sole legal custodialship to litigate as her next friend since the family court order has nullified his ability to act and demand.
The fundamental impact that the court’s decision had on American society in general is that it allowed a basis for a continuing scrutiny and judgment to be used as a referral in similar cases and an active presentation to stop and halt a practice on behalf of his daughter’s exposure to religious acknowledgement or participation in religion in school. The ability to opt out became available and rights to hinder a government’s totalitarian attitude toward religion and its
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
15
active enforcement. Therefore, to be American does not signify the requirement to be a believer in God or be a facilitator and practice of religious acts or verbal acknowledgement.
This case allowed the freedom of choice by the granting of infringement of constitutional rights. But it did not pervert or change the ideology that this is a Godly and Christian nation based and woven on the bible and crusaders of an old era. What it facilitated was the ability to focus on the guarantee of freedom, choice and right to challenge and debate. Further due to the nature of the case it allowed the activating of the Establishment Clause to protect and counter a perceived threat to him as a parent (noncustodial) and his belief vs. the possible unwanted belief he did not want instilled in his daughter.
In effect the ethical concern has not caused a hindrance to the Pledge of Allegiance but a parallel understanding, future support and steadying of a faith and belief in country and man to stand against a perceived wrong and support the right. Summarily, the act is a chosen show of a united face against devouring foes and those who would consequently destroy a nation and people therein by dominance and control. Ethically, it holds true as devised to protect and act as one indivisible front and challenge to retain liberty, justice, mercy, freedom and fairness for all. Ethics being described as moralistic principle is hereby and thereby retained by those whose charge is honor, right and purpose for the people through the people and the further contribution of united codification of rules, conduct and customs.
As such the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance is a deferral to a country based on Christian beliefs and the ultimate honor and privilege to live in a country of freedom even with bittersweet roots it still prevails as a singular purpose of love, indulgence, favor, grace and humility in the face of times of uncertainty. Further it is the axis that the grapple hook has
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
16
clutched upon and provides the rigidity of discipline to act with favor or not. Ultimately, it is the respectful blood that runs in all true Americans whose avenue is to protect, foil and defeat a foe who pretends to be a friend. This is what the Pledge of Allegiance is to act as one with show of intent to protect, serve, venture and command.
Lastly, as far as the public schools reciting the pledge I feel that they should because I recall making that same pledge in elementary school and was proud to be inclusive in the fight against those who would hinder and destroy this nation, these people and all that has been achieved and further to make them understand the value of a person’s word, honor, thought, integrity, fairness and non-discriminating act and visual acceptance of all that includes free choice and mostly the protected right of freedom.
In honor of the pledge is the interpretation of the Star Spangled Banner whose affiliation with the Pledge of Allegiance is synonymous as water and land. As thus each cannot be without the other.
Star Spangled Banner
(Interpretation and written by Felicia McCaw, a friend to a friend, a foe to foe, a loyalist to loyalist, an educator to educate and a love to a love)
For a wonder so bright that the eye cannot deny as we proudly march one by one to defend a land we love
Even though we lost loved ones to fight for our freedom through the stars as the battle reign we marched in and prevailed with tenacious stand and perilous journey we consistently fight
Over bridges high, low our gallants defended us as a truth, as the bombs paraded the air we fought on with our Flag of Independence charging and leading the fight to be free
Waving today over the land and people that said they would be free
Even from the shore it rose waving defiance and intent to be free from a condescending host that helped pave the way
For as the air breathes over each towering sweep we marched on as the blows rain mightily upon us all with concealed and then with clarity
But a beam of light has appeared in its richness and glory and shines forth the Flag still stands and may it continue over the land and people that said they would be free
Where is the one who so valiantly swore that the whipping so deserve would be received with the havoc, war and destruction would leave a home and country no more
Blood of both has fled forth of foe and enemy and left their mark amongst the many
Refuge they have none save as a hireling and slave they will become
We shall come as true terror in the night and give no chance to flight and be known the gloom is your own grave
But again the Flag states we defy the boast and foil the charge for it stands over the land and people that said they would be free
Therefore, let it be forever when the right to be freeman shall stand back to back and fight for their beloved home, land and the end of war’s hate and desolation
REFERENCES
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow. (2017, February 27). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_Grove_Unified_School_District_v._Newdow
The American's Creed. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/creed.htm
The Star-spangled Banner. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/banner.htm
A. (n.d.). Pledge of Allegiance, Our Flag of the United States, It's History and Meaning, Freedom Documents. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.screamforfreedom.com/freedom_documents/pledge_of_allegiance.php
Connor, J. (2015, March 20). Laura Ingraham Equates Arabic Speakers To Skinheads In Pledge Of Allegiance Rant. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/20/laura-ingraham-arabic-skinheads-pledge-of-allegiance-_n_6910562.html
The Pledge of Allegiance. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pledge.htm
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/03pdf/02-1624.pdf
ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. V. NEWDOW. (2004, March 24). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-1624.ZS.html
The Pledge of Allegiance: An Unconstitutional, Unethical Oath. (2015, January 19). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://thezephyrlounge.wordpress.com/2015/01/20/the-pledge-of-allegiance-an-unconstitutional-unethical-oath/
Reid, B. (2014, May 12). Massachusetts Supreme Court Decides Pledge of Allegiance Case. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-reid/massachusetts-supreme-cou_b_5311538.html
Magna Carta. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/magnacarta.htm
Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" Speech. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/i-have-a-dream.htm
Lincoln's House Divided Speech. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/housedivided.htm
Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/libertydeath.htm
Declaration of Independence. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/declaration.htm
United States Constitution. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/constitution.htm
The Monroe Doctrine. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/monroe.htm
Bill of Rights and later Amendments to the United States Constitution. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/amendments.htm
George W. Harkins to the American People. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/harkins.htm
Daniel Webster's Seventh of March Speech. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/seventh_of_march.htm
The Economic Bill of Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/economic_bill_of_rights.htm
The Origin and Meaning of the Pledge of Allegiance - Freedom From Religion Foundation. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://ffrf.org/component/k2/item/18510-the-origin-and-meaning-of-the-pledge-of-allegiance
New laws on ethics, Pledge of Allegiance set to take effect. (2016, August 27). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/27/new-laws-on-ethics-pledge-of-allegiance-set-to-tak/
Ballentine, S. (2016, August 28). New laws on ethics, Pledge of Allegiance set to take effect. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/missouri/2016/08/27/new-laws-ethics-pledge-allegiance-set-take-effect/89492170/
Thompson, M., Bardi, J., Lienhard, J., Hudson, P., & Ardiente, M. (2014, September 02). Over One-Third of Americans Support Removing Under God from the Pledge of Allegiance. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://americanhumanist.org/news/2014-08-over-one-third-of-americans-support-removing-under-g/
Liu, J. (2004, March 18). Under God? Pledge of Allegiance Constitutionality. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.pewforum.org/2004/03/19/under-god-pledge-of-allegiance-constitutionality/
Ask not what your country can do for you (Kennedy's inuagural address). (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/ask-not.htm
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/03/11/05-17257.pdf
CASE TWO
1
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
Strayer University
Felicia McCaw
Professor Clinton Gortney
SOC205
Online Winter 2017
March 1, 2017
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
2
In salutation to the American Flag and the people and our glorious nation I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag of this country that stands as a united force and face against the invasion of terrorism and abject misery inflicted upon all who seek sanctuary in this nation of right. Challenged repeatedly as being unconstitutional and a violation of rights the Pledge of Allegiance stills stands for the fidelity and trust placed rigidly in the hands of the protectors of this country America. Being misconstrued as blind allegiance to the United States it stands to reason that without faith in their mother nation or offspring the facilitory right to uphold the legal sanctions, legal structure of the judicial system, societal structure and rights, social norms and inherent societal functions of alertness would cause the erosion of a patriot and national active stance to serve as a true American who loves the very essence of freedom, liberty and peace for all.
Arguments facing the Pledge of Allegiance encompass the following dissents that support the thought that the language of the pledge violates the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, that the nature of the pledge causes ethical conflict and last that it exemplifies tenants of radical nationalism and fascist idolatry. Further the active use of the phrase of “Under God” is also a supposed hindering and controlling act that causes an infringement of free choice and violation of the First Amendment. As such the oath taken every day is not a fascist act but a realization that it reiterates the devotion of people true to the protection of liberty, freedom, free speech and choice of stance against an invading force that would nullify, void and cancel a free way to life and all its true inherency to be free to evolve a country forward with loyalty and devotion and thankfulness of a country that protects and loves it own.
The supposed thought that the phrase “Under God” is a prevalent and malicious violation of the Establishment Clause when the Flag Code was amended in 1954, when John E.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
3
Thompson, J.D., a graduate of Harvard Law School made distinction that the purpose was to make clarity of a country distinct from communism and atheism and affirm the United States as a country of religion and to further infuse the children with the belief of God and under the protection of God.
As such the rights of Congress to change, modify and adopt renditions, changes are permissive due to the evolve nature of state and government. In reflection, no violation of the Establishment Clause has been adhered to but the act of forethought to bind a unique assortment of races to stand as one against any invasionary force and also benefit the nature of a moral structure by the addition of a religious base to effectively retain the respect, dignity, chastity and base to parlay and trade on equal standing as a new country still in the growing state with other countries of older.
The ethical purpose of the Pledge of Allegiance causes differing interpretations of acceptance in a country rout with structural layers of discrimination, prejudice and oppressions that fulfills a purpose for one and not all. As a structuralized country that provides an ethical point the conclusionary analysis would always be for all races in its inclusiveness. As all are factors of consideration and backers, builders that evolve a nation forward. In consequence, it is not the Pledge of Allegiance but the active phraseology that is being challenged and the dismissive rights of a people oppressed, stifled, muffled, hushed and intimidated and as its inherentory rights are challenged also are rights to have progeny. Even if the Pledge of Allegiance was denied, cancelled still the active oppression, suppression of a people’s quest for freedom would be denied as well as the educational latitude and allowance for growth, expansion, commerce and free law.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
4
Therefore, in all of its states of equity the ethical challenges are mute, void due to the heavy influence of a socialized, internal bias of a country still holding unto the values of superiority and remarkably hate of a race that contributes but is encouraged to be exemplified as a “horror in the night”.
The ethical concern is primarily interwoven with the prevalent challenge of inequality and socialized principles of those viewed as wrong even though right as a consistent pattern of suppression and oppression. Further any active participation of patriotnism is seen unequivocally as a privilege to the free, the proud and the brave but not of a color and race that was held in bondage but still is bound by chains of invisibility. Therefore, the act of nationalism is seen in a hostile facility to disclose the rendering of a no, non-acceptance to those who are free with will of permit as those who are unasked. Once again, the ethical play raises flags of question who is a patriot those of acceptance of the dominant race in this culture or those who actively love a country by migration. A fallacy is not the ethical concern but the annihilation of a race and its supposed unequaled iniquities viewed as socialized inequalities and supposed inability that is rendered by hate, jealousy, spite, venom and distaste. In consequence, the overt inclusion of all races to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance shows not a impairing of nationalism but indeed a mean subtle intent to dislocate, irradiate and destroy a race of unwant.
These revelations are heavily indicated by dual purpose of justice that says “for all” but revolve to differing states when addressing minority issues by slights, alienation and change of outlook by known perception and deceit. Therefore, the case of extreme nationalism becomes a moot issue with no standing or prevalency because it is geared toward one race and not others, which support the theory of leading violence, social ostracism and dismissals of supposed guaranteed inalienable rights for American citizens.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
5
But the question comes who is American now and who is the active benefactor in a country of “who” since this country is a melting pot of diverse cultures, differing languages, religions, ethnicities this too stands to question who is “America” when the chosen language is questioned in the Pledge of Allegiance but the purpose is what? Mockery? Sardonic amusement or an inner ploy to teach hate, disallowance, innate resentment, looks and thoughts of nature of despisement. But as a reflection free thought is actively encouraged, unhindered and is a constitutional right as well as resentment of supposed deflections that are felt detrimental to a country of equal and free with the primary language of English spoken.
As in the case of Massachusetts Supreme Court the Pledge of Allegiance does not act as a facilitator to discriminate against non-religious (Case – Jane Doe vs. Action-Boxborough Regional School District) it still stands as an act of voluntary but a patriotic act. The legal history reflects the pledge as first appearing in 1892, codified in 1942 with “Under God” added in 1954. As a support the Jane Doe case became a parallel when it assisted in the ruling of the 2004 Elk Grove United States School District vs. Newdow that had a similar challenge and query.
The active ingredient in these cases seem to lead to assertions of “they felt included”, “stigmatized”, “marginalized”, “a lack of belonging”, “supposed atheist state”, and since no adverse treatment was received the grounds for complaint were found insufficient, null and void do the act being voluntary. Therefore, since the pledge is not an active dictatorship to religion it does not lead to the fecundity of the act of religion and is once again a challenge and complaint of moot.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
6
Any active charge against constitutional rights are prevalently a charge of the Magna Carta which is the founding block of the Constitution in all its ancestral form and acts of truth, honor, legality, fairness and righteousness for the acts of free man and woman in all stages of livelihood. Active in clauses 1, 27, 34, 38, 39, 40, 42, 54, 61 and 63.
These clauses are evident in each word and writing of the Constitution and protect each and every person in this country from the effects of force, control and dictatorship and denies the act of a totalitarian government. As in the Magna Carta, Martin Luther’s King, Jr.’s speech “I Have a Dream” further highlights and delineates that the negro is still not free but is bound by invisible chains of structuralized oppression and suppression. A crippling state of triumph the mockery hails and sings they are not free by the power act of segregation, educational denial and exile in the country of America. In betrayal of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence the promissory note is looked upon as “what” when it comes to black people but an inalienable right of liberty to all others of differing races with all amenities provided.
The active state of pledging to a country that is “hate” becomes a heartrending state and question of “why” am I not a heir to the promise and right. This act of gradualism is not indeed a happening for the fear of protest is running rampant and thrills the soul to continue, to walk, and protest the version of vision a person of color propelled by the act of socialization, deprivation and mockery. As such the active march of democracy still holds it seductive sway and the promise of a better tomorrow. As the quick sands gather fast, dear and deadly so does the right to fair justice begin to pall as the level of bigotry and hatred spirals out of control and the denial of the fair right to compete on all grounds from basic to intellectual challenge to parlay and exchange. Again 1963, is not an end but a beginning for the coming of judgment begins from this instance when the state of dire retroversion begins its evil song of hate and the fight begins
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
7
for the rights of all to stand for the promise to challenge, query, pause and reflect the state of pledging allegiance to a country that must be fair with competition or the closure of stagnation, limitation, death and foreign dominancy will reign supreme. For indeed the bitter is the sweet and wine of provocation and thought with acts of peace, non-violence and to not incline toward the distrust of all white people for the destiny of two is aligned as the destiny of one. I too have a dream that the Pledge of Allegiance will stand “Tall” for all races for a patriot is a servant and worthy is that servant of his or her country to stand firm and hard against an evil foul to air and earth. Let freedom ring to think, evolve, create and unite.
As in Lincoln’s House Divided Speech a house turned against each other cannot stand, cannot unite, cannot defend, cannot communicate, cannot change, cannot evolve, cannot be. Those against country and man are the treason of the foul and the nature of this country of free enterprise, life and liberty and joy to be within. Understanding the hierarchy tree of history is in its own act a challenge and facilitator to end some of the ramifications of the lingering effects of slavery and consequential interactive purpose of now and denial of rights in any purpose of change. For indeed, Squatter Sovereignty is indeed a mockery when a man is a man and a woman is a woman and all are deemed equal and therefore the affects of slavery and lingering effects become a living force and continuous joke.
As a right, give me liberty or give me death for a life of servitude or slavery is an injustice and regression to an era of horrendous thought and action. Therefore, the inclusion of God and servitude to him became a merciful plead and endeavor to allow the freedom to debate and challenge acts considered at the height of hypocrisy and regressional latitude. The truth whether hurtful or brutal compels a man or woman to act with reason against conflictions to freedom with no standard of yoke placed upon them. For a man or woman of intellect is
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
8
therefore now considered a beast (an ape) of inability to vocalize thought, reason with mind through the usage of pen and pencil of the written and verbal or that he or she indeed is personalification of all that is human but is being treated thus as a residue of slavery and intentional conditioning of a dysfunctional society. For the truth whether partial or all is never negligible but a tangible sword against the unrighteous, deceitful and destroyers of society past is the preventer of folly in present and future even as the insidious curls with malevolency toward the right to protest a wrong still parallel to the legal structure and right to petition, pledge of allegiance and fight an injustice.
Subjugation of a person(s) is not ideal or allocator of support of any constitutional plan and that the act of truth is still the sword of destruction for those who compromise the few, the proud and the brave. For counter to freedom is slavery and that in itself is a factor of defeat but training and educating of all is a right of invoked and not a deflector of ill but a prevailing right of the Declaration of Independence that allows the measure of all for woman, man and child.
That as facilitates the equality of all men (women and children) as endowed by their creation with inalienable rights to live, freedom, prosper, health, happiness and rights of all irregardless of station in life whether impoverish or rich. Just as men are the societal holds, women are the holders as well and in that form they are equated with free choice equitable thought, reason, prudence, safety, freedom of not being chattel and interdisciplinary factors to facilitate happiness and fairness. Therefore, they (he and she) have greeted the Assent of Laws to be blood and hereditary factors of right, evolution and continuance.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
9
As such the need to object is evidential cause for equal measure whether male or female. As guaranteed the lodging of acts to render a person powerless amongst the multitudes is prevented by this act of right (Declaration of Independence) and the Constitution of the United States that prevents a threshold of conspiracy to level and challenge the blood, active nervous system and skeletal framework for this country. As stated in the Monroe Doctrine the rights established have been carved with the deaths of many, blood of millions that propelled the defense of whether one or all and our own pervades the senses and fulfill the wisdom to know a season of change and menace that attacks an entirety and not just a single or double entity and as such it repeals the peace and safety previously granted. Therefore, the active state of oppression surges clear with threat of maim, mental, psychological and physicality.
In consequence, the Monroe Doctrine supports the right to independence and to be de facto as the government to assist in the cultivation of friendly relations, preservation of firm policy and claim of power and its right to pursue same course.
Another factor that helps retain the Pledge of Allegiance is the Bill or Rights with later amendments. The subsequent rights are active under the First Amendment, Amendment 6, 7, and 9, 14 and 15. These amendments effectively state and support the freedom of speech, or press and right of people to peacefully assemble, right to a fair and objective trial, rights in a civil case, rights retained by the people and its protection to not deny or disparage others by the people, whether of the Black nation or minority and right to Black suffrage and its state of exclusiveness in the Pledge of Allegiance and subsequent refusal of acknowledgment of rights of say whether in written form or verbal annotations.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
10
Conclusively, the American’s Creed voices the right and will of the people to act as one, be one and for the people irregardless of ill and actively retain democracy in a republic, which is a sovereign nation of many sovereign states and therefore a perfect union that is one and inseparable which is based upon the principles of freedom, equality, justice and humanity for which all patriots have died for and live for.
As George W. Harkins addressal to the American People that knowing and believing a crisis is at stake and even though the sympathy is for a distressed country we are was and now hedged by two evils, the choice that cost the least vs. the choice that should have ranged and clamored dear to heart. Protection of the legislature and ability to legislate and that which is ours. Therefore, could a mountain of prejudice be removed once justice has been obstructed, prevented and the right of freedom condemned and tainted by voices of ill-repute that prevents a true allocation that parallel and triumphs the truth. Oppression is as it is a trickery to undermine a race’s value in the land of promised and the acts are voluntary and not racially motivated but concealed with racial hate carving its own spear in back and spine. For deceit and hate comes to a protester who clamors for justice as the beating of his or her own heart and a choice to be seen, heard and acknowledged for a measure of peace for a people injured, deceitfully used, lied upon and a need for respite and solitary.
As Daniel Webster’s Seventh of March Speech prevails upon the need for continuous propriety, dignity and its own collective high responsibilities this also serves as facilitator to free choice and respective regard of a body that represents this country it supports the confidence and administering of wise, moderate patriotic confidence to lead the way safely and retain the legal structure and that the denial of agitations cannot be done and that dangers to home, land and
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
11
person exist as well as threat to the justice system. As with the East, the North and South this has caused profound inclarities but affective to internal state is progressively stabilizing but still the lurk of hate and malice is lingering far and strong.
Duty as fidelity is the conclusion to follow the act of tomorrow, renders the judgment and actions of the future and conclusively affect reason, thought, security and ability to protest. Now, the Economic Bill of Rights entail the measure of strategic planning for winning peace and establishment of higher living which would consist of support for a nation continuously under fire and the people therein. In reflection, as thought and theories chase each other so does the question of our founding fathers’ illustrious words of treatise, structural and desire for continuing liberty and freedom. These great thoughts indeed parallel the wish for the people not as a proposal but a challenge to submerse the thoughts of a heretic that a Black man or woman is too primal to escalate a chain of high thought and progress. The acts of increase is progenious to support, appreciation, love and fidelity and as such a state of content cannot be allowed for like time and tomorrow the clock continues and need to change and evolve the people to become self-maintaining, supportive, self-facilitating exists with clear discernment. Therefore, stagnation cannot be cloaked as friend but as a foe to even the most least educated.
Consequently, these rights spell strength, political rights which include free speech without repudiation and ill will, free press, free to worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches, threat of harm and seizures. As thus the right to life and liberty is our blood and is invoked in all who are patriots who appear in any race with no color restrictions or discrimination learned or taught. Further the Economic Bill of Rights guarantees the right to a good education and ability to survive, support and maintain self, husband and family. Further the realization of these rights spell security and right against the odds of injustice.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
12
Lastly, ask not what your country can do for you but believe that a victory in itself is a conclusive stage of mutual interaction that facilitates a give and take scenario. The Lord God has been good and benevolent in his blessing and teaching of patience and await for all battles are his that overcome the small against those of more power and multitudes of many. As with the revolution, the thought that prevail is to be free and was and is uppermost in all thoughts of man, woman and child. As with tempered steel we bend but we arise and fight on.
As a true patriot we are the protectors of those small, young, old and we forget not God’s promise of life with health and abundancy and the fairness of decision by trial, mediation and verdict. Also, that the securing of liberty has costs and those that stand on stance of ill will, will be fought, protested and negotiated fairly as in the case of Elk Grove Unified School District vs. Newdow.
In relation to the case submitted to the Supreme Court for consideration of petition with the complaint of violation of constitutional rights and infringement of the act. In effect Newdow gave challenge as to the preposition of the school transferring and teaching his daughter to submit to reciting the Pledge of Allegiance because of referral and reference to “Under God” since he is an atheist and does not believe in God.
Also, in this case was Sandra Banning (Mother) who filed an inter alia to intervene and have the case dismissed. But as stands the finding concludes that her sole parental rights does not hinder or prevent his challenge or objection and her restrictive wish to not have her daughter as a party to the case. Further holding that he has the right to instill his belief and wish to her in regard to religion.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
13
But based on the Family’s Court Newdow does not have authority to act upon her behalf as either as a next friend or as a parental decider. As decided by the Ninth Circuit, the decision by the Supreme Court was reversed and allowed the infringement of rights pertaining to exposure to any religious content which was done by certiorari to hear additional plea.
The case or lawsuit was originally filed as Newdow vs. Unites Congress, Elk Grove Unified School, et al in 2000. In 2002, the ruling of the United State Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit relayed that the wording in itself “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance serves as an endorsement for religion and thereby violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution. In further judgment, in the year of 2004 the Supreme held that Michael Newdow did not have the right to act as a noncustodial parent nor does he have the standing to bring a suit on behalf of his daughter.
In the year of 2005, a case was appealed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California enjoining the school district defendants from continuing the practice of leading children in pledging allegiance to “One Nation Under God”. Case was later appealed to the Ninth Circuit under Newdow v Carey and was reversed.
Anything levied against the Constitution is presented as a challenge as to the legitimacy of an action that is thought to violate rights. Therefore, presentation has to be submitted to the Federal level and since only Congress can make said determination the right of levy can only be appealed to the United States Congress. If in fact the act is satisfactorily proven as an infringement on civil rights and as a violation of right to not be exhibited to religion or the matter of practicing religion then this in turn supports the act of dismissal of need to be exposed to said offending act or matter then it parallels and confirm true that violation has occurred. But in the
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
14
matter of this case, the act of levy was the phrasing of the Pledging of Allegiance with the words “Under God” being the offensive since the parent is an atheist and objected to the conveying of any religious matter to his daughter and exposure to a belief dissimilar to his own.
The first attempt was to the Supreme Court of the United States which was denied by the Magistrate Judge who deemed and judged that there was no violation of constitutional rights and judgment was subsequently supported by District Court and dismissed. As a further appeal a writ of certiorari was made to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit who overturned the judgment with affirmation that a violation of rights had occurred and stood in a violation of the Establishment Clause and further held due to controversy of parental rights that he was a noncustodial parent, under Article III standing has reservitory rights to challenge the acts of exposure to religion because of his view even if they prove contradictory to hers as such the right to further redress for an alleged injury to his own parental interest was granted.
The active challenge of suit on the basis of next friend was disallowed because of his lack of prudential standing and his position as noncustodial parent vs. Sandra Banning as custodial parent and guardian. Therefore, he has standing but not the sole legal custodialship to litigate as her next friend since the family court order has nullified his ability to act and demand.
The fundamental impact that the court’s decision had on American society in general is that it allowed a basis for a continuing scrutiny and judgment to be used as a referral in similar cases and an active presentation to stop and halt a practice on behalf of his daughter’s exposure to religious acknowledgement or participation in religion in school. The ability to opt out became available and rights to hinder a government’s totalitarian attitude toward religion and its
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
15
active enforcement. Therefore, to be American does not signify the requirement to be a believer in God or be a facilitator and practice of religious acts or verbal acknowledgement.
This case allowed the freedom of choice by the granting of infringement of constitutional rights. But it did not pervert or change the ideology that this is a Godly and Christian nation based and woven on the bible and crusaders of an old era. What it facilitated was the ability to focus on the guarantee of freedom, choice and right to challenge and debate. Further due to the nature of the case it allowed the activating of the Establishment Clause to protect and counter a perceived threat to him as a parent (noncustodial) and his belief vs. the possible unwanted belief he did not want instilled in his daughter.
In effect the ethical concern has not caused a hindrance to the Pledge of Allegiance but a parallel understanding, future support and steadying of a faith and belief in country and man to stand against a perceived wrong and support the right. Summarily, the act is a chosen show of a united face against devouring foes and those who would consequently destroy a nation and people therein by dominance and control. Ethically, it holds true as devised to protect and act as one indivisible front and challenge to retain liberty, justice, mercy, freedom and fairness for all. Ethics being described as moralistic principle is hereby and thereby retained by those whose charge is honor, right and purpose for the people through the people and the further contribution of united codification of rules, conduct and customs.
As such the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance is a deferral to a country based on Christian beliefs and the ultimate honor and privilege to live in a country of freedom even with bittersweet roots it still prevails as a singular purpose of love, indulgence, favor, grace and humility in the face of times of uncertainty. Further it is the axis that the grapple hook has
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
16
clutched upon and provides the rigidity of discipline to act with favor or not. Ultimately, it is the respectful blood that runs in all true Americans whose avenue is to protect, foil and defeat a foe who pretends to be a friend. This is what the Pledge of Allegiance is to act as one with show of intent to protect, serve, venture and command.
Lastly, as far as the public schools reciting the pledge I feel that they should because I recall making that same pledge in elementary school and was proud to be inclusive in the fight against those who would hinder and destroy this nation, these people and all that has been achieved and further to make them understand the value of a person’s word, honor, thought, integrity, fairness and non-discriminating act and visual acceptance of all that includes free choice and mostly the protected right of freedom.
In honor of the pledge is the interpretation of the Star Spangled Banner whose affiliation with the Pledge of Allegiance is synonymous as water and land. As thus each cannot be without the other.
Star Spangled Banner
(Interpretation and written by Felicia McCaw, a friend to a friend, a foe to foe, a loyalist to loyalist, an educator to educate and a love to a love)
For a wonder so bright that the eye cannot deny as we proudly march one by one to defend a land we love
Even though we lost loved ones to fight for our freedom through the stars as the battle reign we marched in and prevailed with tenacious stand and perilous journey we consistently fight
Over bridges high, low our gallants defended us as a truth, as the bombs paraded the air we fought on with our Flag of Independence charging and leading the fight to be free
Waving today over the land and people that said they would be free
Even from the shore it rose waving defiance and intent to be free from a condescending host that helped pave the way
For as the air breathes over each towering sweep we marched on as the blows rain mightily upon us all with concealed and then with clarity
But a beam of light has appeared in its richness and glory and shines forth the Flag still stands and may it continue over the land and people that said they would be free
Where is the one who so valiantly swore that the whipping so deserve would be received with the havoc, war and destruction would leave a home and country no more
Blood of both has fled forth of foe and enemy and left their mark amongst the many
Refuge they have none save as a hireling and slave they will become
We shall come as true terror in the night and give no chance to flight and be known the gloom is your own grave
But again the Flag states we defy the boast and foil the charge for it stands over the land and people that said they would be free
Therefore, let it be forever when the right to be freeman shall stand back to back and fight for their beloved home, land and the end of war’s hate and desolation
REFERENCES
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow. (2017, February 27). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_Grove_Unified_School_District_v._Newdow
The American's Creed. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/creed.htm
The Star-spangled Banner. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/banner.htm
A. (n.d.). Pledge of Allegiance, Our Flag of the United States, It's History and Meaning, Freedom Documents. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.screamforfreedom.com/freedom_documents/pledge_of_allegiance.php
Connor, J. (2015, March 20). Laura Ingraham Equates Arabic Speakers To Skinheads In Pledge Of Allegiance Rant. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/20/laura-ingraham-arabic-skinheads-pledge-of-allegiance-_n_6910562.html
The Pledge of Allegiance. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/pledge.htm
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/03pdf/02-1624.pdf
ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. V. NEWDOW. (2004, March 24). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-1624.ZS.html
The Pledge of Allegiance: An Unconstitutional, Unethical Oath. (2015, January 19). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://thezephyrlounge.wordpress.com/2015/01/20/the-pledge-of-allegiance-an-unconstitutional-unethical-oath/
Reid, B. (2014, May 12). Massachusetts Supreme Court Decides Pledge of Allegiance Case. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-reid/massachusetts-supreme-cou_b_5311538.html
Magna Carta. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/magnacarta.htm
Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" Speech. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/i-have-a-dream.htm
Lincoln's House Divided Speech. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/housedivided.htm
Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/libertydeath.htm
Declaration of Independence. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/declaration.htm
United States Constitution. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/constitution.htm
The Monroe Doctrine. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/monroe.htm
Bill of Rights and later Amendments to the United States Constitution. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/amendments.htm
George W. Harkins to the American People. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/harkins.htm
Daniel Webster's Seventh of March Speech. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/seventh_of_march.htm
The Economic Bill of Rights. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/economic_bill_of_rights.htm
The Origin and Meaning of the Pledge of Allegiance - Freedom From Religion Foundation. (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://ffrf.org/component/k2/item/18510-the-origin-and-meaning-of-the-pledge-of-allegiance
New laws on ethics, Pledge of Allegiance set to take effect. (2016, August 27). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/27/new-laws-on-ethics-pledge-of-allegiance-set-to-tak/
Ballentine, S. (2016, August 28). New laws on ethics, Pledge of Allegiance set to take effect. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/missouri/2016/08/27/new-laws-ethics-pledge-allegiance-set-take-effect/89492170/
Thompson, M., Bardi, J., Lienhard, J., Hudson, P., & Ardiente, M. (2014, September 02). Over One-Third of Americans Support Removing Under God from the Pledge of Allegiance. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from https://americanhumanist.org/news/2014-08-over-one-third-of-americans-support-removing-under-g/
Liu, J. (2004, March 18). Under God? Pledge of Allegiance Constitutionality. Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.pewforum.org/2004/03/19/under-god-pledge-of-allegiance-constitutionality/
Ask not what your country can do for you (Kennedy's inuagural address). (n.d.). Retrieved March 01, 2017, from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/ask-not.htm
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/03/11/05-17257.pdf
SOC205 - ASSIGNMENT ONE - THE STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS
THE STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS
ASSIGNMENT ONE
The State Judicial Selection Process
Strayer University
Felicia McCaw
Professor Clinton Gortney
SOC205
Online Winter 2017
January 31, 2017
The State Judicial Selection Process
2
One of the goals in the overall selection of jurists is to maintain first a collective and cognitiveness of the possibility of maintaining neutrality, equality and impartialality with the placing and selecting and retainership of judges. With that in mind is the realization that all judges are human and are influenced by their interactive life dealing with legal and psychological effect of changes in the world to summarily decide and conclude a case.
Cultural bias is also sometimes a conclusive when dealing and administering a case because their “common sense” is tangible and intangible to their societal pivot, structure and point of view. Further all are subjected to internal interpretation and mediatory contemplation when facilitating and exercising judgment in all cases. Therefore, even though preexisting cultural agendas may exist and as such all have to mitigate possible consequences when effectively concluding judgment and appropriately sentence a case. Consequently, interwoven is the realization of conscious and subconscious need for objectivity, fairness, distance and acknowledgment of difference to allocate clarity in dealing with every case.
As such American judges are conscious of prevalent cultural gaps and the necessitated need to view all as prima facie with requirement to have cultural experts to prove otherwise or indeed an untruth. Therefore, this practice supports steps of alleviating thoughts of judicial cultural bias or favoritism, or acts of negative consequence.
Another contention in the selecting of state judges dwells primarily in the majoritarian processes (retention elections or gubernatorial appointment) to establish judicial retention and because of this the ability to compromise judicial independence becomes a prevalent threat and facilitator to increasing negating of judicial independence. As a consequence and key point judicial elections act as a mean to secure and retain independence as well as eliminating merit
The State Judicial Selection Process
3
selection and reintroducing partisan elections to address the primary concern and that is securing independence. Therefore, the Due Process Clause helps assure the constitutionality required for judicial independence and effectively seal and guarantee all avenues of fairness.
Since the conservatorship of the judicial system is required to be facilitated and executed by either election, gubernatorial appointment or merit selection this helps to retain the majoritarian interests on the initial selection process and then consequently affects the judicial retention period with steadfast allowance and encouragement to continue. On this concept, the prevalence leans heavily for the jurist and favorably for the litigant to retain fair procedure, judgment with restrictions based exclusively on neutral judicial assessment that deals with facts and laws.
In further contemplation of the appointing of state judges at one time all judges were appointed whether for the state or the federal by public officials. And they not only had terms that were referred to as life tenure which allowed the seating on the bench for a lifetime but this progressively changed with the limitations of terms in conjunction with appointment and through popular elections. As it stands to reason both tenure and selection are both processes or metrics of judicial independence. In consequence, the division or change caused a catalystic evolution of the manner the state and federal courts attends in regard to the law and its judicial process. In effect the state courts prevalency to conduct and hear a case is heavily dependent upon the constitutional level of the status of the case and its ability to regulate authority to consequently hear and address the issue at hand.
Therefore, the approach to the constitution is only prevalent to interpretation buts it facilitory right to be applicable in all courts vs just the level of the federal supreme court authority in manners can be heard at the state level as well as the federal. All manners of
The State Judicial Selection Process
4
challenge do not necessarily mean federal as well as all manners do not necessarily mean state level only in the manner of cases to be heard.
Contextual meaning is always a step in determining the manner of case law as well as allow context the ability to change due to differentiating circumstances that might affect its effectiveness or cause an unmitigating sameness. Further in relation to translation these too help in the cause of incorporating originalist-friendly ways to help adjust circumstantial change in relation to constitutional interpretation.
Another point in the manner of structural independence allows a freedom to uphold the independence level and acts of fairness because of 1) Diversity, 2) Interpretation, 3) Commonality of cases, and 4) Electoral selection. This effectively allows steadfast attention of state judges to act with clarity, interpretation and thoroughness to fulfill jurisdictionary right. Further that judges are guardians of the constitution and are dependent on retainership of the dignity, honor and retrospective idealism of America as intended by the founders of this country and as such do not have to be levied to the pressure of securing or pleasing a segmentation of the populace to secure their right to full tenure.
Also, that acts of right are continuance and steadfast associated with the state or act of “good behavior” that ensures the completeness of term and the fortitude to stand and act on the right of the constitution as the backbone and faithful guardians of our most beloved constitution the righteous hand of right for all the people.
Therefore, all acts of judicial independence corresponds to the development and strengthening of state judicial selection to facilitate and allow accountability as well as conceptualized safety, freedom and enforcement of ideas. Consequently, supporting judicial
The State Judicial Selection Process
5
elections of the state and federal level by the utilizing of partisan, non-partisan and merit selection with the ability to prevail understanding of the framework of once again with emphasis on judicial independence.
With the likelihood of judicial independence comes the ability to make distinctions between an electoral voting and an appointing of state judges to fulfill the legislative purpose. Further in relational value the political accountability emerged early with the allowance of local judges to be secured and held to account for cases of active, present and those to be presented.
Therefore, all states have different approaches to appoint state judges using either the partisan, non-partisan, merit, or combination of merit or other appointment methodology for initial selection. The states that do not use elections to secure judges are primarily done by the governor or legislative or a commission based on qualifications either through official or unofficial mechanisms. Further since life tenure is not applicable the ability of retention is the idealistic way when using the “Missouri Plan which is equitable to merit selection” to retain seat and position.
In relation to retention a state judge is critiqued as to his or her performance, ethical outlook, presentation, rating and possible running on a ballot or “party ticket” to continue. Because of this those running on a ballot have a high probability of being retained as a state judge because they are already in an incumbent position and have sufficient support to prevail.
The State of Michigan as reflected of the above-mentioned characteristics for selecting state court judges consist of non-partisans elections and whereby they serve in state trial courts, state courts of last resort that cover general jurisdiction for full terms. In order to retain their position on the bench they must run for re-election.
The State Judicial Selection Process
6
Seven justices or jurists for the Michigan Supreme Court are selected by non-partisan elections at which they serve for eight year terms and have to be re-elected to continue. Furthermore, incumbent judges must file an affidavit of candidacy to request being placed on a ballot whereas non-incumbent candidates must file a nominating petition or acquire a partisan nomination at a party convention.
The chief justice of this court is allowed to serve a two year term and is elected by his fellow justices. Some of the qualifications needed to be elected to this court require a judge to be a qualified elector, licensed to practice law in the State of Michigan, have at least five years of law practice, be under the age of 70 and if they have obtained the age of 70 be allowed to serve out the remainder of their term. Further if a mid-term vacancy occurs the governor will appoint a replacement to serve until the next general election with the state bar’s committee on the basis of judicial qualification interviews, with evaluation and rating of all candidates and confidential reports.
For the Michigan Court of Appeals and Michigan Circuit Court there are 28 judges for the Appeals Court and 221 judges for the Circuit Court with allowance of a six year term. As with the Supreme Court the justices are chosen through non-partisan elections and have to run for re-election. Candidates are placed on ballot via non-partisan primaries of by nominating petitions.
The chief judge of the Appeal and Circuit Courts are chosen or selected by Supreme Court appointment with terms lasting two years. As such to be elected to either the Court of Appeals or the Circuit Court a judge must be a qualified elector of his or her district, licensed to practice law in the State of Michigan have five years of law practice and be under the age of 70 and if the judge (sitting judge) has reached the age of 70 they are allowed to serve out the
The State Judicial Selection Process
7
remainder of term, If on occurrence a vacancy appears on the Appeals or Circuit Court, the process is identical to the procedure used by the Supreme Court and with the assistance of the judicial qualifications committee the governor selects a replacement to serve until the next general election.
Under the limited jurisdiction courts for Michigan, judges are elected to the District Court and Probate Court for six year terms. For both courts the election to this court are non-partisan contested elections, qualified elector of the district and under the age of 70 and have five years of practicing law.
Lastly, the Juvenile Court judges are elected to four year terms by non-partisan contested elections, must be a qualified elector of the district, licensed to practice law in Michigan and be under the age of 70.
The State of Illinois advocated methodology for selecting judges for full terms is by supportive authority. For the State Court partisan election of judges occurs through partisan elections followed by non-partisan retention elections. For the Supreme and Appellate Court the seven justices of the Illinois Supreme Court and the forty-two judges of the Illinois Appellate Court are selected in an identical manner with judges being chosen by popular vote in partisan elections and who serve ten year terms after which they must compete in uncontested non-partisan retention elections to continue serving.
Unlike Michigan, the supreme and appellate court justices in Illinois are elected to represent specific districts and the seven districts are divided among five districts (three allocated to Cook County and the others divided evenly among the other four districts) and are voted into office by the resident of their respective regions.
The State Judicial Selection Process
8
The qualifications to serve on either of these two courts a judge must be a U.S. citizen, a district resident and licensed to practice law in Illinois. The selection of the chief justice or judge of the supreme court is chosen by peer vote to serve a three year term with the chief judge of appellate courts being selected as well by peer vote to serve for only one year. Further in the event of a midterm vacancy the Illinois Supreme Court is responsible for appointing an interim judge. This judge serves until the next general election occurs at least 60 days after his or her appointment at which point the judge must run in a partisan election to continue serving.
There are 513 judges on the Illinois Circuit Court who are elected in partisan elections to six year terms and at completion judges that wish to continue must compete in uncontested non-partisan retention elections. The chief judge of each circuit court as with the supreme and appellate court is selected by peer vote that he or she serves in that capacity indefinitely. Further the circuit courts are also served by 391 associate judges who are limited in that they may not preside over cases in which the defendant is charged with a felony (an offense punishable by one or more years in prison). Associate judges are appointed to four year terms by circuit judges and mid-term vacancies are filled by Illinois Supreme Court appointment as they are on the other courts.
During the examining of Michigan and Illinois, there is a prevalency of consistency of appointing of judges with terms designated, procedure of selecting judges, jurisdiction allowances or segmented sectors that the court covers. In contrasting Michigan to Illinois, Illinois is the more approachable with terms lasting not as long and probably more easier to obtain a starting position, experience and understanding. But the difference lies in the voting and term year for the Supreme and Appellate Court of Illinois vs Supreme Court and Court of Appeals of Michigan. Also, the circuit court is first partisan then non-partisan to retain position in Illinois but in Michigan the circuit court and appeals court is non-partisan and then have to run
The State Judicial Selection Process
9
for re-election to continue. Further Illinois supreme and appellate courts cover segmented districts of seven and the judges are voted into office by the residents of their respective regions whereas in Michigan the court of appeals and circuit court require residents to be a qualified elector of his or her district to be elected. The judges for the court of appeals and circuit court in Michigan are allowed a term of six years whereas in Illinois the judges for the supreme and appellate court are allowed a term of ten years. Both states require license to practice law and be a U.S. citizen to be a judge. The chief justice of the supreme court in Michigan is selected by his or her fellow justices for two years whereas in Illinois the chief justice is selected to serve by peer vote for three years and the chief judge is selected by peer vote for one year.
Both Michigan and Illinois have exacting criteria to meet to be a judge and that is to be a qualified elector, be licensed to practice law in the state with Michigan limiting the age of under 70 and if a sitting judge then allowance to finish term. In the case of vacancy of a judgeship position both Illinois and Michigan have authority allocated to fill position in Michigan by the governor and in Illinois by the Illinois Supreme Court in the supreme courts. In the case of Michigan, the steps needed to remove a judge from his post for disciplinary action consist of one of the following steps:
• Judges can be impeached by a majority vote of the house of representatives and convicted by 2/3 vote of the senate.
• The governor has authority to remove a judge upon the concurrent resolution of 2/3 of the members of both houses of the legislature.
• The supreme court may censure, suspend, retire or remove a judge based on the recommendation of the Judicial Tenure Commission. However, the Judicial Tenure Commission has no authority to actively protest a Supreme Court Justice or prevail upon removal.
whereas in Illinois, judges may be removed by one of the two following ways:
• The Judicial Inquiry Board files complaint with the courts commission and after notice and hearing, the commission may reprimand, censure, suspend, retire or remove a judge.
• Judges may be impeached by a majority of votes by the house of representatives and removed by a 2/3 vote of the senate.
The State Judicial Selection Process
10
During the comparison of Michigan to Illinois, the more approachable appears to be the Illinois court system because of the flexibility and the comparative amount of time that can be allocated to each judgeship position. Also, if starting out the procedural methodology would be enabled to be absorbed because of a starting position and then allowance of a continuance upward as experience is garnered and obtained through the various cases and court systems that allow multiplicity as well as thoroughness in learning the law and its applicable challenges and escapades in each court room.
REFERENCES
Global Reach Internet Productions, LLC - Ames, IA - globalreach.com. (n.d.). Judicial Selection in the States - Methods of Judicial Selection. Retrieved January 31, 2017, from http://www.judicialselection.us/judicial_selection/methods/removal_of_judges.cfm?state
HALL, M. K., KIRKLAND, J.H., & WINDETT, J.H. (2015). HOLDING STEADY ON SHIFTING SANDS. Public Opinion Quarterly, 79(2), 504-523. doi:10. 1093/poq/nfv021
SAGIV, M. (2015). CULTURAL BIAS IN JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING. Boston College Journal Of Law & Social Justice, 35(2), 229-256.
Fitzpatrick, B. T. (2012). THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF FEDERAL JURISDICTION-STRIPPING LEGISLATION AND THE HISTORY OF STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION AND TENURE. Virginia Law Review, 98(4), 839-895
REDISH, M. H., & ARONOFF, J. (2014). THE REAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM WITH STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION: DUE PROCESS, JUDICIAL RETENTION, AND THE DANGERS OF POPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM. William & Mary Law Review, 56(1), 1-58.
Dinan, J. (2013). Independence and Accountability in State Judicial Selection: The People’s Courts: Pursuing Judicial Independence in America. Texas Law Review, 91633.
Arroyo, E. (2016). THE FOUNDING FATHERS SAID I AM NOT SUBJECT TO TERM LIMITS. Touro Law Review, 32(4), 753-761.
Edwards, A. (2015). FINDERS KEEPERS: SELECTING AND RETAINING STATE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 19(4), 1183-1208.
REDISH, M.H. & ARONOFF, J. (2014). THE REAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM WITH STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION: DUE PROCESS, JUDICIAL RETENTION, AND THE DANGERS OF POPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM. William & Mary Law Review, 56(1), 1.
Carp, R. A., Stidham, R., & Manning, K. L. (2014). Judicial process in America. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
ASSIGNMENT ONE
The State Judicial Selection Process
Strayer University
Felicia McCaw
Professor Clinton Gortney
SOC205
Online Winter 2017
January 31, 2017
The State Judicial Selection Process
2
One of the goals in the overall selection of jurists is to maintain first a collective and cognitiveness of the possibility of maintaining neutrality, equality and impartialality with the placing and selecting and retainership of judges. With that in mind is the realization that all judges are human and are influenced by their interactive life dealing with legal and psychological effect of changes in the world to summarily decide and conclude a case.
Cultural bias is also sometimes a conclusive when dealing and administering a case because their “common sense” is tangible and intangible to their societal pivot, structure and point of view. Further all are subjected to internal interpretation and mediatory contemplation when facilitating and exercising judgment in all cases. Therefore, even though preexisting cultural agendas may exist and as such all have to mitigate possible consequences when effectively concluding judgment and appropriately sentence a case. Consequently, interwoven is the realization of conscious and subconscious need for objectivity, fairness, distance and acknowledgment of difference to allocate clarity in dealing with every case.
As such American judges are conscious of prevalent cultural gaps and the necessitated need to view all as prima facie with requirement to have cultural experts to prove otherwise or indeed an untruth. Therefore, this practice supports steps of alleviating thoughts of judicial cultural bias or favoritism, or acts of negative consequence.
Another contention in the selecting of state judges dwells primarily in the majoritarian processes (retention elections or gubernatorial appointment) to establish judicial retention and because of this the ability to compromise judicial independence becomes a prevalent threat and facilitator to increasing negating of judicial independence. As a consequence and key point judicial elections act as a mean to secure and retain independence as well as eliminating merit
The State Judicial Selection Process
3
selection and reintroducing partisan elections to address the primary concern and that is securing independence. Therefore, the Due Process Clause helps assure the constitutionality required for judicial independence and effectively seal and guarantee all avenues of fairness.
Since the conservatorship of the judicial system is required to be facilitated and executed by either election, gubernatorial appointment or merit selection this helps to retain the majoritarian interests on the initial selection process and then consequently affects the judicial retention period with steadfast allowance and encouragement to continue. On this concept, the prevalence leans heavily for the jurist and favorably for the litigant to retain fair procedure, judgment with restrictions based exclusively on neutral judicial assessment that deals with facts and laws.
In further contemplation of the appointing of state judges at one time all judges were appointed whether for the state or the federal by public officials. And they not only had terms that were referred to as life tenure which allowed the seating on the bench for a lifetime but this progressively changed with the limitations of terms in conjunction with appointment and through popular elections. As it stands to reason both tenure and selection are both processes or metrics of judicial independence. In consequence, the division or change caused a catalystic evolution of the manner the state and federal courts attends in regard to the law and its judicial process. In effect the state courts prevalency to conduct and hear a case is heavily dependent upon the constitutional level of the status of the case and its ability to regulate authority to consequently hear and address the issue at hand.
Therefore, the approach to the constitution is only prevalent to interpretation buts it facilitory right to be applicable in all courts vs just the level of the federal supreme court authority in manners can be heard at the state level as well as the federal. All manners of
The State Judicial Selection Process
4
challenge do not necessarily mean federal as well as all manners do not necessarily mean state level only in the manner of cases to be heard.
Contextual meaning is always a step in determining the manner of case law as well as allow context the ability to change due to differentiating circumstances that might affect its effectiveness or cause an unmitigating sameness. Further in relation to translation these too help in the cause of incorporating originalist-friendly ways to help adjust circumstantial change in relation to constitutional interpretation.
Another point in the manner of structural independence allows a freedom to uphold the independence level and acts of fairness because of 1) Diversity, 2) Interpretation, 3) Commonality of cases, and 4) Electoral selection. This effectively allows steadfast attention of state judges to act with clarity, interpretation and thoroughness to fulfill jurisdictionary right. Further that judges are guardians of the constitution and are dependent on retainership of the dignity, honor and retrospective idealism of America as intended by the founders of this country and as such do not have to be levied to the pressure of securing or pleasing a segmentation of the populace to secure their right to full tenure.
Also, that acts of right are continuance and steadfast associated with the state or act of “good behavior” that ensures the completeness of term and the fortitude to stand and act on the right of the constitution as the backbone and faithful guardians of our most beloved constitution the righteous hand of right for all the people.
Therefore, all acts of judicial independence corresponds to the development and strengthening of state judicial selection to facilitate and allow accountability as well as conceptualized safety, freedom and enforcement of ideas. Consequently, supporting judicial
The State Judicial Selection Process
5
elections of the state and federal level by the utilizing of partisan, non-partisan and merit selection with the ability to prevail understanding of the framework of once again with emphasis on judicial independence.
With the likelihood of judicial independence comes the ability to make distinctions between an electoral voting and an appointing of state judges to fulfill the legislative purpose. Further in relational value the political accountability emerged early with the allowance of local judges to be secured and held to account for cases of active, present and those to be presented.
Therefore, all states have different approaches to appoint state judges using either the partisan, non-partisan, merit, or combination of merit or other appointment methodology for initial selection. The states that do not use elections to secure judges are primarily done by the governor or legislative or a commission based on qualifications either through official or unofficial mechanisms. Further since life tenure is not applicable the ability of retention is the idealistic way when using the “Missouri Plan which is equitable to merit selection” to retain seat and position.
In relation to retention a state judge is critiqued as to his or her performance, ethical outlook, presentation, rating and possible running on a ballot or “party ticket” to continue. Because of this those running on a ballot have a high probability of being retained as a state judge because they are already in an incumbent position and have sufficient support to prevail.
The State of Michigan as reflected of the above-mentioned characteristics for selecting state court judges consist of non-partisans elections and whereby they serve in state trial courts, state courts of last resort that cover general jurisdiction for full terms. In order to retain their position on the bench they must run for re-election.
The State Judicial Selection Process
6
Seven justices or jurists for the Michigan Supreme Court are selected by non-partisan elections at which they serve for eight year terms and have to be re-elected to continue. Furthermore, incumbent judges must file an affidavit of candidacy to request being placed on a ballot whereas non-incumbent candidates must file a nominating petition or acquire a partisan nomination at a party convention.
The chief justice of this court is allowed to serve a two year term and is elected by his fellow justices. Some of the qualifications needed to be elected to this court require a judge to be a qualified elector, licensed to practice law in the State of Michigan, have at least five years of law practice, be under the age of 70 and if they have obtained the age of 70 be allowed to serve out the remainder of their term. Further if a mid-term vacancy occurs the governor will appoint a replacement to serve until the next general election with the state bar’s committee on the basis of judicial qualification interviews, with evaluation and rating of all candidates and confidential reports.
For the Michigan Court of Appeals and Michigan Circuit Court there are 28 judges for the Appeals Court and 221 judges for the Circuit Court with allowance of a six year term. As with the Supreme Court the justices are chosen through non-partisan elections and have to run for re-election. Candidates are placed on ballot via non-partisan primaries of by nominating petitions.
The chief judge of the Appeal and Circuit Courts are chosen or selected by Supreme Court appointment with terms lasting two years. As such to be elected to either the Court of Appeals or the Circuit Court a judge must be a qualified elector of his or her district, licensed to practice law in the State of Michigan have five years of law practice and be under the age of 70 and if the judge (sitting judge) has reached the age of 70 they are allowed to serve out the
The State Judicial Selection Process
7
remainder of term, If on occurrence a vacancy appears on the Appeals or Circuit Court, the process is identical to the procedure used by the Supreme Court and with the assistance of the judicial qualifications committee the governor selects a replacement to serve until the next general election.
Under the limited jurisdiction courts for Michigan, judges are elected to the District Court and Probate Court for six year terms. For both courts the election to this court are non-partisan contested elections, qualified elector of the district and under the age of 70 and have five years of practicing law.
Lastly, the Juvenile Court judges are elected to four year terms by non-partisan contested elections, must be a qualified elector of the district, licensed to practice law in Michigan and be under the age of 70.
The State of Illinois advocated methodology for selecting judges for full terms is by supportive authority. For the State Court partisan election of judges occurs through partisan elections followed by non-partisan retention elections. For the Supreme and Appellate Court the seven justices of the Illinois Supreme Court and the forty-two judges of the Illinois Appellate Court are selected in an identical manner with judges being chosen by popular vote in partisan elections and who serve ten year terms after which they must compete in uncontested non-partisan retention elections to continue serving.
Unlike Michigan, the supreme and appellate court justices in Illinois are elected to represent specific districts and the seven districts are divided among five districts (three allocated to Cook County and the others divided evenly among the other four districts) and are voted into office by the resident of their respective regions.
The State Judicial Selection Process
8
The qualifications to serve on either of these two courts a judge must be a U.S. citizen, a district resident and licensed to practice law in Illinois. The selection of the chief justice or judge of the supreme court is chosen by peer vote to serve a three year term with the chief judge of appellate courts being selected as well by peer vote to serve for only one year. Further in the event of a midterm vacancy the Illinois Supreme Court is responsible for appointing an interim judge. This judge serves until the next general election occurs at least 60 days after his or her appointment at which point the judge must run in a partisan election to continue serving.
There are 513 judges on the Illinois Circuit Court who are elected in partisan elections to six year terms and at completion judges that wish to continue must compete in uncontested non-partisan retention elections. The chief judge of each circuit court as with the supreme and appellate court is selected by peer vote that he or she serves in that capacity indefinitely. Further the circuit courts are also served by 391 associate judges who are limited in that they may not preside over cases in which the defendant is charged with a felony (an offense punishable by one or more years in prison). Associate judges are appointed to four year terms by circuit judges and mid-term vacancies are filled by Illinois Supreme Court appointment as they are on the other courts.
During the examining of Michigan and Illinois, there is a prevalency of consistency of appointing of judges with terms designated, procedure of selecting judges, jurisdiction allowances or segmented sectors that the court covers. In contrasting Michigan to Illinois, Illinois is the more approachable with terms lasting not as long and probably more easier to obtain a starting position, experience and understanding. But the difference lies in the voting and term year for the Supreme and Appellate Court of Illinois vs Supreme Court and Court of Appeals of Michigan. Also, the circuit court is first partisan then non-partisan to retain position in Illinois but in Michigan the circuit court and appeals court is non-partisan and then have to run
The State Judicial Selection Process
9
for re-election to continue. Further Illinois supreme and appellate courts cover segmented districts of seven and the judges are voted into office by the residents of their respective regions whereas in Michigan the court of appeals and circuit court require residents to be a qualified elector of his or her district to be elected. The judges for the court of appeals and circuit court in Michigan are allowed a term of six years whereas in Illinois the judges for the supreme and appellate court are allowed a term of ten years. Both states require license to practice law and be a U.S. citizen to be a judge. The chief justice of the supreme court in Michigan is selected by his or her fellow justices for two years whereas in Illinois the chief justice is selected to serve by peer vote for three years and the chief judge is selected by peer vote for one year.
Both Michigan and Illinois have exacting criteria to meet to be a judge and that is to be a qualified elector, be licensed to practice law in the state with Michigan limiting the age of under 70 and if a sitting judge then allowance to finish term. In the case of vacancy of a judgeship position both Illinois and Michigan have authority allocated to fill position in Michigan by the governor and in Illinois by the Illinois Supreme Court in the supreme courts. In the case of Michigan, the steps needed to remove a judge from his post for disciplinary action consist of one of the following steps:
• Judges can be impeached by a majority vote of the house of representatives and convicted by 2/3 vote of the senate.
• The governor has authority to remove a judge upon the concurrent resolution of 2/3 of the members of both houses of the legislature.
• The supreme court may censure, suspend, retire or remove a judge based on the recommendation of the Judicial Tenure Commission. However, the Judicial Tenure Commission has no authority to actively protest a Supreme Court Justice or prevail upon removal.
whereas in Illinois, judges may be removed by one of the two following ways:
• The Judicial Inquiry Board files complaint with the courts commission and after notice and hearing, the commission may reprimand, censure, suspend, retire or remove a judge.
• Judges may be impeached by a majority of votes by the house of representatives and removed by a 2/3 vote of the senate.
The State Judicial Selection Process
10
During the comparison of Michigan to Illinois, the more approachable appears to be the Illinois court system because of the flexibility and the comparative amount of time that can be allocated to each judgeship position. Also, if starting out the procedural methodology would be enabled to be absorbed because of a starting position and then allowance of a continuance upward as experience is garnered and obtained through the various cases and court systems that allow multiplicity as well as thoroughness in learning the law and its applicable challenges and escapades in each court room.
REFERENCES
Global Reach Internet Productions, LLC - Ames, IA - globalreach.com. (n.d.). Judicial Selection in the States - Methods of Judicial Selection. Retrieved January 31, 2017, from http://www.judicialselection.us/judicial_selection/methods/removal_of_judges.cfm?state
HALL, M. K., KIRKLAND, J.H., & WINDETT, J.H. (2015). HOLDING STEADY ON SHIFTING SANDS. Public Opinion Quarterly, 79(2), 504-523. doi:10. 1093/poq/nfv021
SAGIV, M. (2015). CULTURAL BIAS IN JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING. Boston College Journal Of Law & Social Justice, 35(2), 229-256.
Fitzpatrick, B. T. (2012). THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF FEDERAL JURISDICTION-STRIPPING LEGISLATION AND THE HISTORY OF STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION AND TENURE. Virginia Law Review, 98(4), 839-895
REDISH, M. H., & ARONOFF, J. (2014). THE REAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM WITH STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION: DUE PROCESS, JUDICIAL RETENTION, AND THE DANGERS OF POPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM. William & Mary Law Review, 56(1), 1-58.
Dinan, J. (2013). Independence and Accountability in State Judicial Selection: The People’s Courts: Pursuing Judicial Independence in America. Texas Law Review, 91633.
Arroyo, E. (2016). THE FOUNDING FATHERS SAID I AM NOT SUBJECT TO TERM LIMITS. Touro Law Review, 32(4), 753-761.
Edwards, A. (2015). FINDERS KEEPERS: SELECTING AND RETAINING STATE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 19(4), 1183-1208.
REDISH, M.H. & ARONOFF, J. (2014). THE REAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM WITH STATE JUDICIAL SELECTION: DUE PROCESS, JUDICIAL RETENTION, AND THE DANGERS OF POPULAR CONSTITUTIONALISM. William & Mary Law Review, 56(1), 1.
Carp, R. A., Stidham, R., & Manning, K. L. (2014). Judicial process in America. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
SOC205 - CASE ONE - UNITED STATES vs. LOPEZ
UNITED STATES v LOPEZ
CASE ONE
1
United States v Lopez
Strayer University
Felicia McCaw
Professor Clinton Gortney
SOC205
Online Winter 2017
January 19, 2017
United States v Lopez
2
The case of the United States v Lopez is reflective of a minor (Alfonso Lopez, Jr.) who had in his possession a concealed unloaded weapon (.38 caliber revolver along with five cartridges) on school property and into the school (Edison High School) in San Antonio, Texas on March 10, 1992. According to questioning and confrontation by school authorities after receiving a tip Lopez admitted to having a weapon in his possession. Subsequently, he was charged in the trial court of Texas with violating the Federal Gun-free School Zones Act of 1990 (the “Act”), 18 U.S.C. § 922 (q) which is part of the Crime Control Act of 1990 that Congress passed to address the growing concerns about school violence and that was enacted and signed into law on November 29, 1990.
This Act as explained provides that “it shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm in a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone” and with provision of knowledge the maximum penalty is five years of imprisonment.
Because acts of a felonious nature are submitted and channeled through the district court also known as trial court for judgment. The trial courts are the district courts which have general jurisdiction of Texas. Each court is established by the Legislature and covers certain geographical areas and each county must be served by at least one district court. These courts have original jurisdiction in felony criminal cases, cases involving title to land, divorce cases, election contest cases and civil matters involving damages exceeding $200. Therefore, it was necessary to place the case in this court because they have priority and right as designated by Legislature to hear, then render a judgment of punishment.
United States v Lopez
Page 3
Represented by legal counsel, Lopez moved to have the indictment dismissed on the grounds that 922 (q) of the Act was “unconstitutional as it is beyond the power of Congress to legislate control over our public schools” Subsequent motion was denied by the trial court (which is the district court) ruling that the 18 U.S.C. § 922 (q) was a correct ruling and within the right of congress and as such “a constitutional exercise of Congress' well defined power to regulate activities in and affecting commerce, and the 'business' of elementary, middle and high schools...affects interstate commerce”.
Based on this denial Lopez was tried, convicted and subsequently appealed said decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals with which was allowed by a writ of certiorari. In reception of Lopez’s appeal that Congress’ power to legislate under the Commerce Clause was indeed unfounded the Fifth Circuit concurred and reversed said conviction. As such the inability to harness and utilize the full power of Congress in this case under the Commerce Clause became realized and it held that what is characterized as insufficient finding by congressional examination and legislative history “section 922(q) in the entire reach of its terms is invalid and beyond Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause” 2F.3d 1342, 1367-1368 (1993). Due to the reflective importance of the issue the court granted certiorari, 511 U.S. ___ (1994) and conclusively now affirm. Further this case (514 U.S. 549) is noted to be the first United States Supreme Court since the New Deal to set a limit to Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. During the examination of the case and its contents the federal court of appeals found that the federal statute violated the Tenth Amendment as well and by a vote of five to four the Court upheld the ruling. Another point is that the Lopez decision became a renaissance for the principle of dual sovereignty which had not been utilized since Carter v Carter Coal Co. (1936).
United States v Lopez
Page 4
In explanation, the Commerce Clause is interactive between nations and parts of nations and is conversely in all its branches with regulations for prescribing rules to carry out its diverse interactions. Therefore, the commerce is the power to regulate and ensure that this vesting of power in Congress is complete and enabled to be exercised to its utmost limits other than those prescribed in the constitution that cause a limitation as written.
Because of the attributing and establishing of whether the act of Lopez’s entry into a school zone or within 1,000 feet was a measure in determining if the commerce clause was applicable in the determining factor of sentence since the matter was seen as a felonious act. The commerce clause became a limit on federal power due to the line between “affecting” and “substantially affecting” interstate commerce that is ambiguous and Congress can easily manipulate its findings or compilations regarding the magnitude of an activity’s affect on interstate commerce.
This gray area was deemed pretty much “no man’s land” due to Congress inability to review substantially congressional findings in this area and because the court deemed they were ill-equipped to do the review the court established a categorical limit on Congress’ exercise of the commerce power with hope to preserve the constitutional role. Consequently, Lopez was charged, sentenced and due to the true actual nature of the inability to make a clear standing he was allowed the rescinding of his sentence during his appeal.
The generalized law for carrying a concealed weapon is based on Penal Code 46.01, number three which was a violation and because of this an undisclosed or concealed firearm is a device designed, made or adapted to propel a projectile through a barrel and was a clear violation of the law with further definition of the weapon as a handgun that can be fired by one hand. As
United States v Lopez
Page 5
such this supports that a reckless, disregard for all safety was inclusive in the handling and carrying of such on a campus that forbade the allowance of any type of weaponry. This action violated the Gun-free School Zones Act (GFSZA) which is a federal law of the United States that prohibits any or all unauthorized individuals who knowingly possess a firearm at a place that is perceptively known as a school zone or within a school zone or has reasonable cause to believe it is as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921 (a)(25).
Therefore, this law 18 U.S.C. § 922(q) (2) (A) was broken as well as the local criminal Texas Penal Code § 42.02 and Texas Penal Code § 46.03, section one, which explains the causal factor of what is inclusive in the act of concealing and keeping a gun hidden for acts of a criminal nature. Due to the breaking of these laws the penalty for violation of the Act includes a fine of not more than $5,000, imprisonment for not more than five years or both 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(4). Further the Texas Penal Code § 46.11 was violated because said offense was within 300 feet of the premises of a school and inside as well.
The ramifications associated with the breaking of laws are identified by coding whether coding for the penal systems for each state or the federal system and these codes are aligned with the imposition of a prison term or conditional punishment. As such the consequences of his or her actions will always result in solutions to rectify the deviation, restore correctness and rectification whether it consists of community service, fines, incarceration of a few years to a lifetime imprisonment and/or the death penalty.
In conclusion, the outcome of the case was reflectively analyzed by the Supreme Court by determination to question the contested issues that flawed the judgment of the district court.
United States v Lopez
Page 6
The clause did not fit the category of the crime and subsequently was dismissed due to action of not having merit, clarity or a legal and established point to support decision. Further due to the need to administer a fair judgment adherence to the penal codes would have effectively closed the loop and also allowed a just and fair judgment.
REFERENCES
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/PE/htm/PE.46.htm
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.criminal-lawyer-houston-texas.com/TEXAS-WEAPON-LAWS.pdf
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-sullivan/the-commerce-power/united-states-v-lopez-4/print/
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/cj/penalcode.pdf
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.txcourts.gov/about-texas-courts/trial-courts.aspx
Libdatab login. (n.d.). Retrieved January 20, 2017, from http://search.credoreference.com.libdatab.strayer.edu/content/entry/sageedlaw/united_states_v_lopez/0
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=5e47e1e9-2ee8-4a1c-a142-2a38522aa7e1%40sessionmgr4009&hid=4211&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=9601096660
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990
CASE ONE
1
United States v Lopez
Strayer University
Felicia McCaw
Professor Clinton Gortney
SOC205
Online Winter 2017
January 19, 2017
United States v Lopez
2
The case of the United States v Lopez is reflective of a minor (Alfonso Lopez, Jr.) who had in his possession a concealed unloaded weapon (.38 caliber revolver along with five cartridges) on school property and into the school (Edison High School) in San Antonio, Texas on March 10, 1992. According to questioning and confrontation by school authorities after receiving a tip Lopez admitted to having a weapon in his possession. Subsequently, he was charged in the trial court of Texas with violating the Federal Gun-free School Zones Act of 1990 (the “Act”), 18 U.S.C. § 922 (q) which is part of the Crime Control Act of 1990 that Congress passed to address the growing concerns about school violence and that was enacted and signed into law on November 29, 1990.
This Act as explained provides that “it shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm in a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone” and with provision of knowledge the maximum penalty is five years of imprisonment.
Because acts of a felonious nature are submitted and channeled through the district court also known as trial court for judgment. The trial courts are the district courts which have general jurisdiction of Texas. Each court is established by the Legislature and covers certain geographical areas and each county must be served by at least one district court. These courts have original jurisdiction in felony criminal cases, cases involving title to land, divorce cases, election contest cases and civil matters involving damages exceeding $200. Therefore, it was necessary to place the case in this court because they have priority and right as designated by Legislature to hear, then render a judgment of punishment.
United States v Lopez
Page 3
Represented by legal counsel, Lopez moved to have the indictment dismissed on the grounds that 922 (q) of the Act was “unconstitutional as it is beyond the power of Congress to legislate control over our public schools” Subsequent motion was denied by the trial court (which is the district court) ruling that the 18 U.S.C. § 922 (q) was a correct ruling and within the right of congress and as such “a constitutional exercise of Congress' well defined power to regulate activities in and affecting commerce, and the 'business' of elementary, middle and high schools...affects interstate commerce”.
Based on this denial Lopez was tried, convicted and subsequently appealed said decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals with which was allowed by a writ of certiorari. In reception of Lopez’s appeal that Congress’ power to legislate under the Commerce Clause was indeed unfounded the Fifth Circuit concurred and reversed said conviction. As such the inability to harness and utilize the full power of Congress in this case under the Commerce Clause became realized and it held that what is characterized as insufficient finding by congressional examination and legislative history “section 922(q) in the entire reach of its terms is invalid and beyond Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause” 2F.3d 1342, 1367-1368 (1993). Due to the reflective importance of the issue the court granted certiorari, 511 U.S. ___ (1994) and conclusively now affirm. Further this case (514 U.S. 549) is noted to be the first United States Supreme Court since the New Deal to set a limit to Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. During the examination of the case and its contents the federal court of appeals found that the federal statute violated the Tenth Amendment as well and by a vote of five to four the Court upheld the ruling. Another point is that the Lopez decision became a renaissance for the principle of dual sovereignty which had not been utilized since Carter v Carter Coal Co. (1936).
United States v Lopez
Page 4
In explanation, the Commerce Clause is interactive between nations and parts of nations and is conversely in all its branches with regulations for prescribing rules to carry out its diverse interactions. Therefore, the commerce is the power to regulate and ensure that this vesting of power in Congress is complete and enabled to be exercised to its utmost limits other than those prescribed in the constitution that cause a limitation as written.
Because of the attributing and establishing of whether the act of Lopez’s entry into a school zone or within 1,000 feet was a measure in determining if the commerce clause was applicable in the determining factor of sentence since the matter was seen as a felonious act. The commerce clause became a limit on federal power due to the line between “affecting” and “substantially affecting” interstate commerce that is ambiguous and Congress can easily manipulate its findings or compilations regarding the magnitude of an activity’s affect on interstate commerce.
This gray area was deemed pretty much “no man’s land” due to Congress inability to review substantially congressional findings in this area and because the court deemed they were ill-equipped to do the review the court established a categorical limit on Congress’ exercise of the commerce power with hope to preserve the constitutional role. Consequently, Lopez was charged, sentenced and due to the true actual nature of the inability to make a clear standing he was allowed the rescinding of his sentence during his appeal.
The generalized law for carrying a concealed weapon is based on Penal Code 46.01, number three which was a violation and because of this an undisclosed or concealed firearm is a device designed, made or adapted to propel a projectile through a barrel and was a clear violation of the law with further definition of the weapon as a handgun that can be fired by one hand. As
United States v Lopez
Page 5
such this supports that a reckless, disregard for all safety was inclusive in the handling and carrying of such on a campus that forbade the allowance of any type of weaponry. This action violated the Gun-free School Zones Act (GFSZA) which is a federal law of the United States that prohibits any or all unauthorized individuals who knowingly possess a firearm at a place that is perceptively known as a school zone or within a school zone or has reasonable cause to believe it is as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921 (a)(25).
Therefore, this law 18 U.S.C. § 922(q) (2) (A) was broken as well as the local criminal Texas Penal Code § 42.02 and Texas Penal Code § 46.03, section one, which explains the causal factor of what is inclusive in the act of concealing and keeping a gun hidden for acts of a criminal nature. Due to the breaking of these laws the penalty for violation of the Act includes a fine of not more than $5,000, imprisonment for not more than five years or both 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(4). Further the Texas Penal Code § 46.11 was violated because said offense was within 300 feet of the premises of a school and inside as well.
The ramifications associated with the breaking of laws are identified by coding whether coding for the penal systems for each state or the federal system and these codes are aligned with the imposition of a prison term or conditional punishment. As such the consequences of his or her actions will always result in solutions to rectify the deviation, restore correctness and rectification whether it consists of community service, fines, incarceration of a few years to a lifetime imprisonment and/or the death penalty.
In conclusion, the outcome of the case was reflectively analyzed by the Supreme Court by determination to question the contested issues that flawed the judgment of the district court.
United States v Lopez
Page 6
The clause did not fit the category of the crime and subsequently was dismissed due to action of not having merit, clarity or a legal and established point to support decision. Further due to the need to administer a fair judgment adherence to the penal codes would have effectively closed the loop and also allowed a just and fair judgment.
REFERENCES
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/PE/htm/PE.46.htm
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.criminal-lawyer-houston-texas.com/TEXAS-WEAPON-LAWS.pdf
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-sullivan/the-commerce-power/united-states-v-lopez-4/print/
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/cj/penalcode.pdf
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.txcourts.gov/about-texas-courts/trial-courts.aspx
Libdatab login. (n.d.). Retrieved January 20, 2017, from http://search.credoreference.com.libdatab.strayer.edu/content/entry/sageedlaw/united_states_v_lopez/0
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=5e47e1e9-2ee8-4a1c-a142-2a38522aa7e1%40sessionmgr4009&hid=4211&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=9601096660
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
