Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Category Archives: Constitution

Universal Background Checks Require Gun Registration

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, August 14, 2019: 

In spite of fading support for universal background checks, as reported by CNN on Tuesday, there are still some in the White House and nearly all of the mainstream media who are deliberately keeping the conversation in favor of background checks going.

According to CNN, lawmakers are reconsidering the political risks of pushing for universal background checks in this highly toxic political environment leading up to elections next year. “It’s a sign of a possible divide between Trump and his party,” wrote CNN, and that many Republicans “have appeared skeptical” about Trump’s belief that he needs to “do something meaningful” following the mass shootings in Texas and Ohio last week. It added that “several conservative allies and Republican lawmakers have privately voiced opposition to his push for [universal] background checks.”

This hasn’t fazed the New York Times in the slightest, declaring that

Keep reading…

What’s Wrong with Red Flag Laws? After All, They Don’t Apply to Me!

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, August 14, 2019: 

Red flag laws are pernicious, not because they are evil (which they are), nor because they’re unconstitutional (which they are), nor because they don’t work (which they don’t). It’s because, says Missouri Representative Tony Lovasco, people who think about them (if they think about them at all) are certain they don’t apply to them. After all, who in their right mind would even dream of shooting up a Walmart?

Lovasco (R-Mo.), writing in The Hill, exposed the danger of the thinking by law-abiding citizens that such laws could never apply to them: “Proponents of gun control (and make no mistake, red flag laws are gun control) want you to think, ‘I’m not like them. This isn’t about me.’ But you are like them, and it is about you. It’s about everyone.”

Every American citizen, gun owner or not, has unalienable rights, wrote Lovasco: “The right to face your accuser. The right to due process. The right to protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Every one of these rights is explicitly violated under red flag laws.”

Added Lovasco:

Keep reading…

A Closer Look at the Dangers of Red Flag Laws

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, August 13, 2019: 

As the hysterical cries continue, demanding that government “do something” about gun violence, more thoughtful advisors and commentators are digging more deeply into the dangers of “doing something.” Especially concerning is the rush to implement major infringements of gun rights, with many politicians using the flawed argument that “If even one life is saved, infringements on the rights of many are justified.”

This is the siren song of tyranny.

Former Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke said everyone should take a deep breath and step back from the ledge: “I like to remind people that we should never make sweeping policy changes in a state of hysteria. A wiser course of action would be for elected officials to talk people in off the ledge so we can have a reasonable conversation about the horrific incident after things settle down. Emotion-based policy always turns out to be a lousy policy loaded with unintended consequences.”

One especially grievous black mark in America’s recent history is the rush to judgment about Japanese Americans in the months after Pearl Harbor. President Franklin Roosevelt issued an executive order forcibly removing more than 110,000 of them from their homes and into “internment” (read: concentration) camps. They were guilty of nothing more than being Japanese. As Colonel Karl Bendetsen (the architect of the program) put it, anyone with “one drop of Japanese blood” would be taken from their homes by force and placed in concentration camps.

The Supreme Court never ruled on the constitutionality of the incarceration of these American citizens, although their Fourth Amendment rights were clearly violated. Modest financial reparations were belatedly made by the federal government to those survivors in 1988, along with an apology.

Tony Lovasco (R-Mo.) exposed the danger of thinking that red flag laws could never apply to law-abiding citizens. After all, most people would never dream of shooting up a Walmart store. Wrote Lovasco, “Proponents of gun control (and make no mistake, red flag laws are gun control) want you to think, ‘I’m not like them. This isn’t about me.’ But you are like them, and it is about you. It’s about everyone.”

Every American citizen, gun owner or not, has unalienable rights, wrote Lovasco: “The right to face your accuser. The right to due process. The right to protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Every one of these rights is explicitly violated under red flag laws.”

Added Lovasco:

Keep reading…

Chances of New Gun Controls Fade with the Passage of Time

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, August 12, 2019: 

Once the media hype dies down, the present push for more infringements on the rights of law-abiding gun owners will fade away as well. It is helpful to remember what is perhaps the single most important legacy of the Trump administration: the outing of the mainstream media as nothing more than howling dogs barking at each other over the back fence. They have been exposed as mouthpieces for the Deep State. They are like the Boy Who Cried Wolf: if you always tell lies, people will eventually stop believing you; and then when you’re telling the truth for a change, when you really need them to believe you, they won’t.

It’s also helpful to remember that the president has no ideological foundation rooted in the Constitution. He’s the ultimate pragmatist, a businessman seeking only to solve problems the most expeditious way possible. He also would like very much to get reelected next November.

Put all that together then, and the New York Times is right: Said the paper, the president’s past “flip-flops” on background checks “raises questions about his real commitment to legislation that would improve the background check system.”

Liberal Politico agrees:

Keep reading…

Trump Gets Pushback from NRA, Senators, 2A Organizations, and Opinion Molders Over His Push for New Gun Control Laws

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, August 12, 2019:

Starting early last Monday morning, President Trump began calling his supporters and other policymakers for advice on what to do following the Dayton and El Paso mass shootings.

He spoke several times with Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive officer of the National Rifle Association (NRA). On Thursday LaPierre issued a statement condemning the push for more gun controls, including expanded background checks to include private sales and congressional pressure urging states (along with promises of federal money) to adopt red flag laws. LaPierre stated:

I’m not inclined to discuss private conversations with President Trump or other key leaders on this issue. But I can confirm that the NRA opposes any legislation that unfairly infringes on the rights of law-abiding citizens.

The inconvenient truth is this: the proposals being discussed by many would not have prevented the horrific tragedies in El Paso and Dayton. Worse, they would make millions of law-abiding Americans less safe and less able to defend themselves and their loved ones.

LaPierre added:

Keep reading…

Pelosi Asks Trump to Call a Senate Vote on House-passed Gun Control

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, August 9, 2019: 

During Friday morning’s free-ranging meeting with the press, President Trump once again reiterated his determination to pass “meaningful,” “common sense” background checks and red flag laws.

When asked about resistance from the National Rifle Association, Trump quipped, “They’ll come around.” (After all, following Trump’s demand that his ATF ban bump stocks, there was nary a puff of resistance from the NRA.)

This is the opening that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is using to demand that President Trump call back the Senate from summer recess to vote on further infringements of the Second Amendment.

Pelosi referred to that opening in her demand letter:

Keep reading…

Opposition to Gun-Free Zones Is Gathering Momentum

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Friday, July 19, 2019: 

Vincent Smith’s petition urging Virginia Beach’s city council to repeal its “gun free zone” ruling is gaining even more momentum. As noted here last month (see Sources below), Smith, a city engineer, saw a gap in the security measures allegedly protecting city employees. He said, “The gap was not allowing employees to carry a firearm … instead, people were forced – like I am every day – to choose between earning a living and saving my life.”

The first time he tried, his effort fizzled. His petition received only 260 signatures. But following the ghastly shooting at Virginia Beach’s Municipal Center (where Smith works, but was absent on the day of the shooting) that resulted in the murder of 12 of his co-workers before police could intervene, he tried again. When this writer checked on June 27, there were 3,179 signatures (his initial goal was 2,500). As this is being written (July 18), Smith’s petition now has 5,366 signatures, and Smith has raised his goal to 7,500.

Said Smith: “I want a real consideration by council and a real discussion about changing the HR policy … what happened [on May 31] could have been minimized.” Once his petition reaches 7,500 signatures, the Virginia Beach city council will have that opportunity.

And so will the House of Representatives if Rep. Thomas Massie’s bill continues to gain traction. His Safe Students Act, which would repeal the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act, just received a massive boost by the 650,000-member Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA). Its chairman, Alan Gottlieb, said on Wednesday that the federal ban on guns in “gun-free” zones has been an unmitigated disaster:

Keep reading…

Representative Massie’s Safe Students Act Gains Major Endorsement

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, July 18, 2019: 

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the 650,000-member Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), endorsed the Safe Students Act of Representative Thomas Massie’s (R-Ky.) on Wednesday. In his endorsement, Gottlieb noted that the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, an act that made schools into gun-free zones and that would be repealed by the Safe Students Act, has been an unqualified failure:

The Gun-Free School Zones Act was passed by Congress in 1990, and it’s been a disaster. It has not prevented a single tragic school shooting, but instead has given students, teachers, administrators, and parents a false sense of security that evaporates the moment some madman ignores the law and invades a school campus to commit mayhem.

 

By declaring schools to be “gun-free,” the law has simply turned schools into risk-free, target-rich environments for disturbed people willing to harm innocent children and teens.

On the other hand, Massie’s bill, if it becomes law, would allow local and state jurisdictions the freedom to decide on the issue for themselves. Said Gottlieb:

Keep reading…

Brilliant California Lawyer Applauds Trump’s Court Picks

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, July 17, 2019: 

Ben Feuer, chairman of the California Appellate Law Group, has been deemed one of the top appellate litigators in California. The National Law Journal calls him an “Elite Boutique Trailblazer” while the Los Angeles Daily Journal named him one of the “Top 40 Lawyers Under 40.” The San Francisco Bar awarded him its “Outstanding Barrister” prize, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals appointed him an “appellate lawyer representative,” one of just a handful of attorneys selected from the Ninth’s 11-state jurisdiction for that position.

And so, when Feuer wrote in February that “Thanks to Trump, the liberal 9 th Circuit will be liberal no more” he knows whereof he speaks.

He had nothing but praise for Trump’s appointees who are reshaping the judicial landscape not only at the Ninth Circuit but across the land:

Keep reading…

Trump’s Court Nominees Beginning to Make a Difference

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, July 16, 2019: 

When Donald Trump took office in January 2017, there were more than a hundred judicial court vacancies waiting for him to fill. With Senate confirmation of Daniel Bress to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last week, thanks to retirements since then, the president has filled 127 vacancies.

And the impact of his “originalist” appointments is now beginning to be felt.

Although most attention has been paid to the confirmation battles over Supreme Court nominees Neal Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, it’s the appeals courts which do the heavy lifting — or as Caleb Parker of Fox News put it, these are the “big leagues” of the judiciary system. That’s because, of the 7,000 cases sent to the Supreme Court for judicial review every year, it accepts only around one percent of them. This leaves the decisions made at the appeals level in place.

The numbers tell part of the story.

Keep reading…

CBO Counts Cost of Raising Minimum Wage to $15

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, July 9, 2019:  

Just a week before the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives is due to vote on its Raise the Wage Act, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) calculated its possible impact on the economy. The bill, if enacted into law (highly unlikely), would gradually raise the minimum wage in the country from its present level of $7.25 an hour to $15 an hour by 2024.

The CBO concluded that, “For most low-wage workers, earnings and family income would increase, which would lift some families out of poverty [for a single person, that level is $1,040 a month; for a family of four, it’s $2,145 a month]. But other low-wage workers would become jobless, and their family income would fall — in some cases, below the poverty level.”

The CBO did its calculations, and drew its conclusions, based on three different scenarios:

Keep reading…

States Win a Significant Victory on Wednesday

This article was published by the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Friday, June 21, 2019: 

When the founders were trying to build a government that recognized the dangers inherent in any government – the inevitable tendency for power to grow and freedom to shrink, as Jefferson noted – it limited the federal government to a few enumerated powers with the others reserved to the states or to the people.

This didn’t satisfy the anti-federalists, who insisted that the powers of the federal government be even further restricted. They demanded additional limitations or they would withhold ratification. Thus was birthed the Bill of Rights. Included is the Tenth Amendment, which captures the essence of the Constitution and Americanism itself: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

President Obama couldn’t have cared less. Back in 2015 he was driven to use the threat of climate change to require the states to implement restrictions on carbon emissions or else his EPA would come in and do it for them.

He called it his “Clean Power Plan.” He based it on two assumptions:

Keep reading…

The U.S. is a Republic, Not a Democracy, but Electoral College Abolishers Don’t Care

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, June 19, 2019: 

Don’t call them popular vote supporters. Call them by their real name: Electoral College abolishers, and along with it, the American Republic.

The Founders knew their history. Said John Adams: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” His eldest son, John Quincy Adams, agreed: “The experience of all former ages has shown that, of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating, and short-lived.”

So did the “Father of the Constitution,” James Madison: “Democracies have been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

Supporters of the National Popular Vote coalition don’t seem to care. Instead they are promoting direct democracy. The group claims that such a move “would make every person’s vote equal throughout the U.S. It would ensure that every vote, in every state, will matter in every presidential election.”

It would do no such thing, according to Constitutional scholar and Gettysburg College professor Allen Guelzo. A week after Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, Guelzo wrote that complaints that Trump won only in the Electoral College but not the popular vote were understandable, but unjustified in light of the Founders’ original intents: “The Electoral College is at the core of our system of federalism.” He added:

Keep reading…

1961 Supreme Court Decision Likely to Decide Sanctuary City Issue

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, June 17, 2019:  

When three Cleveland police officers demanded entry into Dollree Mapp’s home in 1957, she demanded to see a search warrant. They didn’t have one. They were looking for a bombing suspect. When they returned a few hours later, they claimed they now had a search warrant but didn’t show it to her. They entered her home anyway and didn’t find the suspect. Instead they found some “lewd” literature, possession of which was illegal under Ohio law.

She was tried, convicted, and sentenced for possession. Her conviction was upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court but reversed by the Supreme Court in 1961:

Keep reading…

Florida Governor Signs Ban on Sanctuary Cities; President Trump Approves

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, June 17, 2019:

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said he was fulfilling a campaign promise on Friday when he signed into law a bill prohibiting local municipalities from adopting “sanctuary city” laws. The new law, which becomes effective next month, also requires law-enforcement officials in the state to “cooperate” with federal ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) officials when they present a “detainer request” on individuals being held on criminal charges in the state. The new law also provides sanctions for law-enforcement officials who don’t comply.

Tweeted DeSantis:

Earlier this year I made a promise that we would ban sanctuary cities in Florida and today we are delivering on that promise.

 

I am proud to sign the bill … to uphold the law and ensure that our communities are safe.

Then the governor compared sanctuary cities to “gun-free zones”:

Sanctuary cities basically created law-free zones where people can come to our state illegally and our country illegally, commit criminal offenses and then just walk right out the door and continue to do it.

Upon learning about the action of DeSantis, President Trump tweeted:

Keep reading…

“Originalist Thinking” Informing Recent Court Rulings

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, June 5, 2019: 

Steven Calabresi carefully defined the difference between “originalism” and “living constitutionalism.” A law professor at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law, Calabresi wrote:

Originalism is a theory of the interpretation of legal texts, including the text of the Constitution. Originalists believe that the constitutional text ought to be given the original public meaning that it would have had at the time that it became law….

 

Living constitutionalists believe that the meaning of the constitutional text changes over time, as social attitudes change, even without the adoption of a formal constitutional amendment.

Candidate Trump promised to nominate only “originalists” to fill judicial vacancies, and he has kept, and is keeping, his promise. One of them, Trevor McFadden, now sits on the bench of the District Court for the District of Columbia and gave a lesson on “originalist” thinking in a recent case:

Keep reading…

Trump Judge Rules House Can’t Stop Him From Building Wall Using Other Funds

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, June 4, 2019:

As a candidate for president Donald Trump promised that, if elected, he would nominate judges and justices on the basis of their commitment to “original intent” of the Founders when they crafted the U.S. Constitution in 1787. One of those judges used the words of our Founders in a ruling on the contentious issue of President Trump’s “beautiful wall.” Trevor McFadden, who served previously as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department, was nominated to the District Court for the District of Columbia in June 2017 and took office in October.

The “beautiful wall” issue came to his attention after House Democrats sued Trump and his administration, claiming that he broke the law by threatening to move monies the House had already approved for other purposes toward building the wall.

McFadden disagreed in his ruling issued on June 3:

Keep reading…

Virginia Beach Shooting Gives Gun-Grabbers Another Opportunity

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Saturday, June 1, 2019: 

The shooting at a state government office building in Virginia late Friday afternoon by an employee seeking revenge over being fired from his job is already giving anti-gunners another opportunity to promote their anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment agenda.

DeWayne Craddock, a 40-year-old former engineer with the city’s public utilities department, planned his attack carefully in advance. Police reported that over recent weeks he legally purchased a number of firearms including the .45-caliber semi-automatic handgun and semi-automatic rifle that he used in his attack. He chose the perfect time to commit his crime:

Keep reading…

Alabama Targets Roe v. Wade With Its Complete Abortion Ban Bill

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, May 15, 2019: 

The bill that just passed the Alabama State Senate banning almost all abortions in the Yellowhammer State was designed specifically to challenge the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling. The bill — House Bill 314, the “Human Life Protection Act” — declares that a fetus is a human being with all inherent rights, and that a provider performing an abortion that ends that life could be sentenced to life in prison. There are no exceptions for rape or incest; the only one is when “an abortion is necessary in order to prevent a serious health risk” to the mother.

The bill’s sponsor, Representative Terri Collins, called the bill a “direct attack” on Roe v. Wade, adding, “The heart of this bill is to confront a decision that was made by the court in 1973 that said the baby in the womb is not a person. This bill addresses that one issue. Is that baby in the womb a person? I believe our law says it is.”

The ACLU of Alabama, along with the National ACLU and Planned Parenthood, is preparing a lawsuit to challenge the bill even though it has yet to be signed into law by Governor Kay Ivey. She is expected to sign it, but even if she doesn’t, the strong majorities in both houses that passed the bill would be more than sufficient to override her veto.

The legislation was drafted by Eric Johnston,

Keep reading…

Dems Call for More Gun Control After Colorado Shooting

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, May 8, 2019:

The shooting by two students at the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) high school in Highlands Ranch (a suburb of Denver) that left one student dead and eight others wounded, some seriously, predictably elicited calls for more gun control from a number of progressive Democrats. The fact that the school was located just seven miles away from Columbine High School, and that the shooting took place just three weeks after the 20th anniversary of the Columbine shooting, was just gravy on that red meat.

In their tweets and other public statements, the Democrats said nothing about the

Keep reading…

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2018 Bob Adelmann