Wednesday, May 11, 2011

New Hampshire House Votes To Repeal Cap And Trade And Other Cap And Trade/Greenhouse Gas News

State by State Look at Cap And Trade News, EPA’s Greenhouse gas push On states, And A Supreme Court Oral Argument on Greenhouse Gas Emissions that is raising national concern

A.EPA’s Regulatory Train Wreck (The Summary And 56 Page Detail Inside Look Into EPA’s Regulatory Push)

1. Page 8, Cramming Greenhouse Regulation On The States
“With time running out in 2010, EPA threatens states with construction bans for large industrial and manufacturing resources if the states did not make the necessary laws and regulatory changes”
2. Page 44 to 50, What You and The Legislatures Can Do
3. Page 51 to 52, State By State Look At EPA’s Regulatory Push

B. Supreme Court “Public Nuisance” Lawsuit (News Release And 84 Page Argument)

“The federal appellate court below called this case ‘an ordinary tort suit’ and ruled it could go forward. In fact, the case is unprecedented. The legal issues before the Supreme Court today are technical ones at this stage of the case. But if the appellate court decision is affirmed, it would eventually mean anyone could sue any entity – including individual humans – who emits carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.”

Articles Of The Week

State Utilities Ask EPA To Boost Regional Cap And Trade

NH Votes To Repeal Cap And Trade

Climate Activists Target States With Lawsuits

Summary of EPA’s Regulatory Train Wreck

EPA’s Regulatory Train Wreck Provided By American Legislative Exchange Council

Reactions To A Supreme Court Global Warming Case

The Global Warming Nuisance Supreme Court Lawsuit

Other Climate Change News

RGGI News DE Wants Out, PA Doesn’t Want In, NH And NJ Making Progress

Bills To Bar EPA Green House Gas Rules

A New Front – What Is Happening State by State

New York RGGI: A Few Sighs Of Relief Over Cuomos Budget

California: State Cap And Trade Programs Under Fire

Massachusetts Cooling To Global Warming Alarmists

Record Cold Linked To Global Warming The Urban Legend Grows

Christie Considers Pulling Out Of RGGI

Global Warming Flatliners

EPA And Oil Production

Greenhouse Gases And The Courts

Maine Lawmaker Proposes To Withdraw State From RGGI

Reject RGGI

RGGI Cap And Trade

RGGI Is Not Causing High Energy Costs

Lawmakers Urged To Protect Ratepayers By Rejecting DEP Standards

Midwest Cap And Trade Is It Dead Or No?

Pew Global Center on Cap And Trade

Thursday, May 5, 2011

How To Protect Your Property Rights Against ICLEI/Sustainable Development

Concerns Over ICLEI/Sustainable Development Grows

Article Of The Week

March 2011 List Of ICLEI Cities (Updated List)

How To Fight Back Against Sustainable Development

ICLEI Can Not Be Constitutionally Joined By Any City Or Local Government

States Against ICLEI

Texas: A Threat To Personal Property Rights

Kansas: Jaco Tax Dollars and Agenda 21

Louisiana: Educating Towns On Agenda 21

In Utah: ICLEI Threatening Property Rights One Community At A Time

Washington State: Kick Iclei Out!!_20100410407/

South Carolina and Sustainable Development

The Anti ICLEI Movement In New York

Montgomery County Pennsylvania Rejects Agenda 21

Richmond VA: Remove ICLEI!!

New Mexico: How Sacred Is Your Property

Alaska: ICLEI Questions

In Texas: Agenda 21 stirs questions: Contention In Las Cruces

Washington State: Property Rights And Sustainability Groups Focus On FourC Forum

Democrats Against ICLEI

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Update On States Right To Work Legislation

Articles Of The Week

Business Roundtable Statement On NLRB Action Against Boeing

Obama Administration Attempting To Force Out CEO Over Marketing Violations

NLRB v Jones And Steel Corporation

“It also signaled an end to the Supreme Court's striking down New Deal laws that sought to reshape the national economy. From Jones onward the Court permitted the federal government to take a dominant role in matters of commerce. The balance of power between the federal government and state governments shifted dramatically in the years following this decision.”

States That have Passed Right To Work Laws

Mass Democrats Vote To Restrict Public Sector Union Collective Bargaining

Done: Scott Walker Signs Union Regulation Bill

NH Senate Passes Right To Work Bill By A Veto Proof Majority

Ohio Senate Passes Bill TO Cut Bloated Union Salaries And Benefits

Indiana House Passes Right To Work Law

Other Union News

Forced Unionism Hot In West Viriginia (Gov. Manchin and Obama Support Union Monopoly Bargaining)

New Jersey: Workers Rights Are At Stake In Labor Battles Nationwide, Not In The Way Union Bosses Claim

Gary Jason: California Needs Right To Work Laws

Do Not Pass Go: Missouri Rallies Halts Republicans Anti Union Bills

Debate Over Right To Work laws Rages In Maine

Vermont Union Facts

Rhode Island Considers Collective Bargaining bill

Right To Work On The March In Statehouses

What Unions Are Saying

AFCME international Passes Battle For Workers Rights Resolution

SEUI: Right To Work Legislation Doesn’t Build The Economy

AFL-CIO: SO Called Right To Work Legislation Don’t Boost Jobs

Thursday, April 21, 2011

State Referendums And Initiatives

Video Of The Week

Steve Wynn On The State Of The Economy And Obama

State Initiatives And Referendums

I have received several emails on initiative and referendum questions. There is no easy answer since each states constitution and requirements are different. Below is information provided on this subject. Communities will have to come together to research and understand laws as well as understand referendums, initiatives and community concerns.

Each Secretary of States website should provide a manual to help you understand the procedures for any initiative or referendums process within the state depending on the states Constitution. The link, Initiative And Referendum Institute below will get you started on what to look for and what to do for each of the 50 states.

Defining Initiatives And Referendums From The Legal Dictionary

The right reserved to the people to approve or reject an act of the legislature, or the right of the people to approve or reject legislation that has been referred to them by the legislature.

The referendum power is created by state constitutions and is conferred on the citizens of a state or a local subdivision of the state. Referendum provides the people with a means of expressing their opinion on proposed legislation before it becomes operative as a law. The power of referendum does not permit the people to invalidate a law that is already operative but suspends or annuls a law that has not yet gone into effect. In this sense, referendum is similar to a governor's Veto power. Also, by referendum the people may reinstate an act that the legislature has expressly repealed.

The referendum, along with the initiative, are the two forms of direct legislation adopted by many states during the direct democracy movement of the early twentieth century. Referendum allows the people to state their opinion on laws that have been enacted by the legislature, and the initiative allows the people to propose their own laws. Thus, in the states that have adopted the initiative and referendum, the people essentially form another branch of the legislature, having the ability both to enact laws and to overturn laws passed by the elected legislature but not yet in effect. An initiative or a referendum passed by the people has the same force and effect as any act of the legislature. A referendum may be challenged on constitutional grounds, on grounds that proper procedures were not followed in the referendum process and election, or on grounds that the referendum or initiative was outside the scope of authority granted by the state constitution. Also, in some states the governor may veto an initiative or referendum.

The general initiative and referendum were first adopted in the United States in South Dakota in 1898, and many states soon followed. The movement toward direct legislation did not grow from a desire of the people to exercise the legislative function directly. Rather, many people distrusted their legislative bodies, believing that large corporations and powerful groups of individuals were corrupting legislation. The power of referendum made most legislation subject to the will of the people.

The referendum power is derived solely from a state's constitution and applies to that state's laws; people do not have the right to challenge federal legislation by referendum. The right of referendum and the procedure to be followed in exercising the referendum right are set forth in the state's constitution and statutes. The referendum process is essentially the same in every state. First, there must be a petition for referendum that states, among other things, the title and nature of the legislative act the petition seeks to have submitted for referendum. The petition is then circulated for signatures. Generally, anyone eligible to vote may sign a petition for referendum, even if he or she is not registered to vote. When the required number of signatures is collected, the petition is filed. If the petition is certified as sufficient, the referendum measure is placed on the election ballot for approval or rejection by the people. If the required number of votes, usually a majority of the votes cast, are in favor of the referendum, it passes. Usually, the people vote on a referendum measure during the general election, but special referendum elections also may be held.

In some states there is no limit on the referendum power, and any law may be challenged by referendum. In many states, however, the constitution creates exceptions to the referendum power for certain types of legislation. Commonly, constitutional provisions regarding referendums create an exception for laws necessary for the support of the state government and state or public institutions, because a referendum on any such measure might cause a branch of the government to cease to function. This exception applies mainly to tax and appropriation measures. Also, most states create an exception to the referendum power for laws necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, thereby allowing the legislature to exercise the Police Power unimpaired. Finally, measures declared by the legislature to be emergency measures are usually not subject to referendum.

Define a State Referendum

Initiative And Referendum Institute

More on initiatives and Referendums

Thursday, April 14, 2011

The Slight Of Hand Budget Deal

What The history of Municipality Bankruptcy looks like, The “slight of hand” budget deal, Obama’s $3.8 Trillion Budget Spending Plan, Boehner’s statement on the $38 billion deal and the bullet point plan to cut the budget, Paul Ryan’s 10 Year Budget Plan, Rand Paul’s Five Year Budget Plan, George Soros and some Democrats say keep spending…AHHHH…One Big Happy Spending Dysfunctional Family!!!

House Speaker John Boehner is correct when he said, “It is not a revenue problem…It is a spending problem.”

Rand Paul’s Shutdown Prevention Act

Videos of The Week

Rep. Jason Chaffetz – The Budget Shell Game

George Soros Says The US Can Take On More Debt (US Debt is $14.2 Trillion with another $1 trillion to be spent by October of this year in 2011…Huh!!…)

Article of The Week

The History Of Municipality Bankruptcy: The Bankruptcy That Isn’t (Interesting Read!!)

The Slight Of Hand Numbers In The Budget Deal Provided By

Smoke. Mirrors. Sleight of hand. Sleight of mouth. Lies.

The budget deal of 2011 is voodoo on the American people. You have lied to us about the true size of the cuts this budget deal supposedly contains.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the cuts were an "historic" $78.5 billion. But that was based on hoped for spending, not real spending.
Then the story changed. The reported number was $38.5 billion in ACTUAL cuts. Most of you politicians agreed that this was still "historic," but it was really just more hocus pocus . . .

The claimed $38.5 billion is really just a magic trick. Another lie.
The National Journal reports that the real cuts to the discretionary programs the GOP was supposedly targeting amount to a mere $14.7 billion.

In other words, the remaining $23.8 billion were MAGICAL cuts, NOT real cuts! But beware, because I know how your bad magic works . . .

The Associated Press reports that you simply failed to renew spending associated with the economic crisis that WASN'T supposed to be repeated anyway! For instance, Congressional leaders gave themselves credit for . . .

* $350 million from a 2009 program for dairy farmers who were then suffering from low milk prices
* $650 million that had been a one-time infusion into highway programs
* $1.5 billion in "savings" relative to last year because you gave the President only $1 billion in "high-speed" rail grants
The Associated Press further reports that another $5 billion came from an arcane bookkeeping rule that allows you to claim an entire victim compensation fund as a cut, just because you put a cap on payments out of that fund. Neat trick.
But I have to wonder if it will lead to members of Congress being prosecuted for accounting fraud under the Sarbanes-Oxley law?

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot, the law doesn't apply to the magicians of Capitol Hill. I'm not allowed to do your accounting gimmicks.

But the illusions continue. Congressional leaders also gave themselves credit for . . .

* Cuts to earmarked money piles, when the House had already banned earmarks back in January
* Four czars the President had already eliminated
* Other items PREVIOUSLY scheduled to be de-funded
* $2.5 billion that could NOT possibly be spent this year on highway repairs
* A $3.5 billion surplus from a program that provides health care to children of low-income families

A statement provided by House Speaker John Boehner (Thanks to a fellow concerned citizen for sharing the information)

• THE LARGEST SPENDING CUT IN AMERICAN HISTORY. The agreement will immediately cut $38.5 billion in federal spending – the largest spending cut in American history in terms of dollars – just months after President Obama asked Congress for a spending “freeze” that would mean zero cuts.
• HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS IN SPENDING CUTS OVER THE NEXT DECADE. The agreement will cut hundreds of billions of dollars from the federal budget over the next decade – “real money,” as the Wall Street Journal editorial board recently noted.
• OFFICIALLY ENDS THE “STIMULUS” SPENDING BINGE. The agreement begins to reverse the “stimulus” spending binge that began in 2009 – signaling the official end of a period of unprecedented government intervention that former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan and other economists say hurt job creation in America by crowding out private investment.
• SETS STAGE FOR TRILLIONS MORE IN SPENDING CUTS. Clears the way for congressional action on House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget – The Path to Prosperity – which cuts trillions in spending and offers a long-term blueprint for American job creation.
• GUARANTEES SENATE VOTE ON REPEAL OF OBAMACARE. The agreement reached with Senate Democrats guarantees a Senate debate and vote on legislation that would repeal President Obama’s government takeover of health care in its entirety. The House passed such legislation in January as part of the Pledge to America.
• NEW TOOLS IN THE FIGHT TO REPEAL OBAMACARE. The agreement will generate new tools for the fight to repeal Obamacare by requiring numerous studies that will force the Obama Administration to reveal the true impact of the law’s mandates, including a study of how individuals and families will see increased premiums as a result of certain Obamacare mandates; a full audit of all the waivers that the Obama Administration has given to firms and organizations – including unions - who can't meet the new annual coverage limits; a full audit of what's happening with the comparative effectiveness research funding that was in Obamacare and the president’s failed “stimulus” spending bill; and a report on all of the contractors who have been hired to implement the law and the costs to taxpayers of such contracts.
• DENIES ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO THE IRS. The Obama administration has sought increased federal funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) – money that could be used to hire additional agents to enforce the administration’s agenda on a variety of issues. This increased funding is denied in the agreement.
• GUARANTEES SENATE VOTE & DEBATE ON DE-FUNDING PLANNED PARENTHOOD. The agreement with Senate Democrats guarantees a Senate debate and vote on legislation that would end federal funding for Planned Parenthood.
• BANS TAXPAYER FUNDING OF ABORTION IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The agreement includes a complete ban on federal funding of abortion in the District of Columbia, applying the pro-life principles of the Hyde Amendment (“D.C. Hyde”).
• MANDATORY AUDITS OF THE NEW JOB-CRUSHING BUREAUCRACY SET UP UNDER DODD-FRANK. The agreement subjects the so-called Consumer Financial Protection Bureau created by the job-destroying Dodd-Frank law to yearly audits by both the private sector and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to monitor its impact on the economy, including its impact on jobs, by examining whether sound cost-benefit analyses are being used with rulemakings.


• The American people have just won the largest real dollar spending cut in American history. To help create a better environment for job creation, House Republicans successfully negotiated $38.5 billion in Washington spending cuts for this year just months after President Obama asked Congress for a spending “freeze” that would mean zero cuts.
• These cuts are historic. They represent the largest year-to-year spending cut since World War II.
• The cuts in spending for this year represent almost two-thirds of those contained in H.R. 1. The agreement shows the American people that the Republicans they sent to Washington did what they said they would do by fighting President Obama and Senator Harry Reid over the spending trajectory in this country.
• This agreement cuts hundreds of billions of dollars from the federal budget over the next decade.
• While these cuts are historic, they are woefully inadequate to cure our nation’s spending-drive debt crisis because they represent only a fraction of the problem. However, House Republicans have struck a historic blow to the culture of spending in Washington.
• These cuts are critical because they represent the first step to taking our nation off the path to national bankruptcy, to giving employers the confidence they need to expand their businesses, and to sparing our children of lives indebted to the Chinese.
• The reality is that House Republicans control one-half of three branches of government in Washington, and President Obama and Washington Democrats have fought our efforts to cut spending every step of the way.
• We fought to keep the government open so we could cut spending. They wanted to shut the government down to keep spending money we don’t have.
• We have to stop spending money we don’t have. We have to stop borrowing 42 cents on the dollar, much of it from the Chinese, and sending the bill to our children and grandchildren.
• If families across America have to tighten their belts, Washington should do the same.

• We didn’t get into this crisis overnight, and we will not get out of it overnight. That is why House Republicans will now advance our fight from saving billions of dollars to saving trillions of dollars as we turn our focus in earnest to Chairman Paul Ryan’s Path to Prosperity budget.

Additional Debt And Budget News

Barack Obama’s Budget Plan

Representative Paul Ryan Budget Plan

Rand Pauls Budget Proposal">">

White House Details Cuts Made In Proposal

Debt Jumped $54 Billion In Eight Days

Looming Debt Ceiling

Actual Federal Expenditure Topped $1 Trillion

Friday, April 8, 2011

The Necessary And Proper Clause


Samples debates from the book The Origins Of The Necessary And Proper Clause

“Why, then, have the clause? It made clear that Congress would have the power to carry out the ends entrusted to it. But this did not mean Congress could do anything it chose to do. If the necessary and proper clause has often been referred to as the “elastic clause,” or the “sweeping clause” because it recognized incidental powers, this did not necessarily entail casting off all limits to its scope.”

“THE ORIGINS OF THE NECESSARY AND PROPER CLAUSE begins with a sweeping survey of British statutes from the eighteenth century that granted power to illustrate, essentially, that they had little influence on American practice. Gary Lawson and Guy Seidman conclude that American practice is an “ocean apart” from British practice. The larger point of this preliminary and thorough analysis is to demonstrate “a care in drafting” statutes and constitutions in America that did not clearly exist across the ocean (p.47). This also reveals that “language mattered” and those who first interpreted the necessary and proper clause – Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Marshall – all acted “on that assumption” (p.51). This leads the authors to conclude that the American Constitution “was a carefully constructed instrument” (p.51). This being so, the authors turn in a more focused manner to the riddle of “necessary” and “proper.””

“Turning to the drafting of the Constitution, Natelson argues that members of the Convention had not only been exposed to the ideal of fiduciary trust, but tended to think of government in terms of agency. This may be particularly so of the Committee of Detail as all but one of its members were lawyers. The crucial aspect of this analysis is that “proper” was not simply thrown in as a reiteration of “necessary.” As Natelson argues, “The word ‘necessary’ was inserted into the proposed Constitution to communicate that Congress would enjoy incidental powers. The separate insertion of the word ‘proper’ strongly suggests it had a meaning separate from necessary, and almost certainly a restrictive one” (p.93). And, in this case, proper was a reference to Congress’ fiduciary responsibilities. Thus even if it had implied powers, it needed to exercise them in a manner consistent with its delegation of powers – that is, in a “proper” fashion.”

The Origin Of The Necessary And Proper Clause

If You Would Like To Purchase The Origins Of The Necessary And Proper Clause

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Transformation Of The Educational System

Thanks to the hard work of Michael Chapman who descibes in detail how the UN and the United States Government has changed the Educational System in the United States.(the video is 60 minutes) I broke down the video and provided the links discussed to back up the information.

It is hard to believe that something like this is possible, but it is. Fortunately, parents are able to choose the schools they want their children to attend.

Continue to educate each other.

How is Sustainable Development and Education tied together? Through The No Child Left Behind passed by George W. Bush and is being reinitiated by Barack Obama:

Some Highlights From The Video

-March 26th MN Governor Signs The Declaration Of World Citizenship
-The Department Of Educations in partnership with OERI (Office Of Education and Research And Improvement) by design is to Implement World Citizenship ideology and Sustainable Development in the schools
-8th Grade School Book, A More Perfect Union - is teaching that the Constitution can CHANGE WITHOUT AMENDMENT - "The Constitution is not a rigid document"
-The Declaration Of Independence is now being taught as a document that limits the people instead of it being taught as the foundations of our freedom
-The 9th and 10th amendment is not taught in schools
-National Council For Socials Studies Had this to say
1.Total Transformation Of Our Society
2.Facts and Information (Knowledge) no longer primary purpose of education
3.Connection between economic (sustainable)development and human capitol (labor)
-Education of Sustainable Development equals preparation for Global Citizenship (Agenda 21)
-The Challenge Of Governance - "Zoning is the system of land control that gives the government the power to define the use of land in certain areas"
-National Content And Standards in Economics says Government often defines and protects property rights
-2003, Then Senator Steve Kelly said "The Declaration has no legal status in defining peoples rights and privileges
- The UN has Declared 2005 to 2015 The Decade Of Education on Sustainable Development and had designated UNESCO as the lead agency to promote and Integrate Sustainable Development in all levels of Education.

Video Of The Week

Michael Chapman - All About Education

No Child Left behind ties together the Workman Investment Act, Educate America Act, and The School To Work Act. Here are the links:

No Child Left Behind

Workforce Investment Act

Goal 2000 - Educate America Act

The School To Work Act in 1994

Sustainable Development, Education, And The Economy

Agenda 21 Chapter 36: Promoting Education, Public Awareness, And Training

In The ESD Toolkit says: World Citizenship encompasses the values, constellation of principles, attitudes and behaviors that the people of the world must embrace if sustainable development is to be realized.

Regional Education Laboratory Program

National Council Of Social Studies

What Democracy Means To Ninth Graders

National Council For Education

8th Grade School Book - A More Perfect Union

The Challenge Of Governance

Friday, March 18, 2011

International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives

ICLEI Announces Nine New Star Beta Communities
Atlanta, GA, Boulder, CO, Chattanooga, TN, Cranberry Township, PA, Des Moines, IA, New York, NY, King County, WA, Washington, DC, St Louis, MO

Articles Of The Week

In Montana, Regulated Into Poverty

California, Your Hometown & United Nations Agenda 21

Videos Of The Week

ICLEI Concerns

More States Concerned Over ICLEI

-Amador County, California Supervisors Terminate ICLEI
-Edmund Oklahoma – A City Council workshop to share ideas about sustainability was abandoned
-Colorado County Residents Reject Behavior-modifying Recommendations in Agenda 21

The Fight Against ICLEI Moves To Virginia

Hey ICLEI; Get Outta Dodge!!

Maryland Commissioners Dump United Nations ICLEI

In New York,For Some Cities Green Movement Raises Flags

ICLEI Agenda 21 voted in Florida

More ICLEI In The News

International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives

Initiative For Sustainable Communities And States

Project Manager, Sustainable Development Software

Friday, March 11, 2011

Sharia Law vs The Constitution


US Constitution

Article I - All legislative Powers shall be vested in the Congress.

Sharia Law

The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah. (a1.1) It is not a sin to comply with man-made laws that require buying auto insurance or having a photo ID because “the authorities are responsible for the sin, not the individual forced to comply.” (w42.3 and w50.4)


US Constitution

Section 8 – Powers of Congress include to levy taxes, to make laws, and to declare war.

Sharia Law

It is obligatory to obey the commands and interdictions of the caliph or his representative in everything that is lawful, even if he is unjust . . because the purpose of his authority is Islamic unity, which could not be realized if obeying him were not obligatory. (o25.5) The caliph or his representative have the duty of undertaking jihad if their territory borders on enemy lands, of dividing the spoils of battle, and of remitting a fifth for “deserving recipients.” (o25.9(8))

Jihad is obligatory for everyone when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims. (o9.3) It is permissible in jihad to cut down the enemy’s trees and destroy their dwellings. (o9.1)


US Constitution

Article II, Section I -- Qualifications of a President – He must be a natural born citizen, thirty-five years old, and a resident for fourteen years. The President is elected by ballot by the people (via the Electors) and shall serve for no more than 2 four-year terms.

No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Sharia Law

A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave, a male, of the Quraysh tribe, etc. (o25.0)

The Caliph appoints a group to select his successor among themselves. There is no a term of office. However, the caliphate of someone who seizes power is considered valid, even though his act of usurpation is disobedience, in view of the danger from anarchy and strife that would otherwise ensue. (o25.4(3))

(Note: The Islamic Caliphate was disbanded the Turkish Parliament in 1924.)


U.S. Constitution

Section 4 – The President and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from office if found guilty of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Sharia Law

(No provision for removal from office.)


US Constitution

Article VI – This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made under it shall be the supreme law of the land, and judges in every state shall be bound by them.

Senators and Representatives, legislative officers, all executive and judicial officers both of the United States and the several states shall be bound by a Oath or Affirmation to support the Constitution.

Sharia Law

The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah. (a1.1)


US Constitution

Amendment 1 – Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.

Sharia Law

Non-Muslims are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. Non-Muslims are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures, or make a public display of feast days or funerals. Non-Muslims are forbidden to build new churches. A non-Muslim may not enter a mosque without permission. The protection for non-Muslims is withdrawn if a non-Muslim commits adultery with a Muslim woman or marries her, leads a Muslim away from Islam, kills a Muslim, or says anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam. (o11.5 through o11.10)

US Constitution

Amendment 2 – The right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Sharia Law

It is a condition that someone buying weapons be of a people who are not at war with Muslims. (k1.2(f))

Enormities (sins) include selling weapons to non-Muslims who will use them against us. (w52.1(192))

US Constitution

Amendment 3 – No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner prescribed by law.

Sharia Law

(Not covered.) However, the Pact of Omar (636 AD) imposed on Christians in Syria, “We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.”

US Constitution

Amendments 4 – 8 – These amendments prohibit unreasonable searches, require due process according to the law, provide for confrontation of witnesses, impose jury trial on all matters involving over $20, and prohibit excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishments. Amendment 14 provides for equal protection of the laws for all citizens.

Sharia Law

No testimony may be made by people who have lowly jobs, such as a street sweeper or a bath house attendant, or non-Muslim. (o24.2-3)

Testimony regarding fornication or sodomy requires four male eye-witnesses to the act. (o24.9)

A woman’s testimony is worth only half that of a man. (o24.10)

(There is no provision for a jury trial under Sharia Law.)

Cruel and unusual Islamic punishments include 1) stoning for adultery (o12.2); 2) scourging 40 lashes with hands, shoes, ends of clothes, or a whip for drunkenness (o16.3); 3) severing the right hand for theft of over $36 and the left foot for a repeat offense (o14.1); and 4) death for apostasy from Islam. (o8.2)

Indemnity for accidentally killing a male Muslim is 100 camels or 4,235 grams of gold. (Current value: $144,000.) Indemnity for killing a woman is half that of a man, for killing a Jew or a Christian is one-third of the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a killing Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth of that of a Muslim. The indemnity for causing a miscarriage is one slave. (o4.9)

There is no indemnity for a killing a non-Muslim at war with Muslims, an apostate, or someone sentenced to death by stoning. (o14.17)

Jews and Christians are subject to a “poll tax” not less than 1 dinar (Current value: $144) per adult male per year. No maximum is stipulated. (o11.4) This is a penalty for remaining in their ancestral religion instead of embracing the “religion of truth.” (o9.8)

A husband may beat a “rebellious” wife for 1) not allowing immediate sexual intercourse when he asks for it, at home, and if she can physically endure it; 2) answering him coldly; or 3) being averse when she was previously kind. (m5.1 and m10.12) The only limitation is that he may not break her bones, wound her, or cause bleeding.

US Constitution

Amendment 13 Slavery and involuntary servitude are abolished.

Sharia Law

The section on Slavery (k32.0) is not translated into English. The provisions remain in Arabic. The editor of “The Reliance of the Traveler” claims that these provisions are no longer applicable, yet they remain in there in the text of Sharia Law. Elsewhere, the manual states, “Originally the status of slave was simply the outcome of having been taken as a prisoner of war. A captive who could not buy his own freedom by means of ransom remained in the possession of the captor until he had earned his freedom by work or until he was granted liberty by his master.” (w13.1)

US Constitution

Amendment 21 repealed “prohibition,” thereby allowing manufacture, sale, and transport of alcoholic beverages.

Sharia Law

It is unlawful to sell grapes to someone who will make wine from them. (k4.9) “Allah cursed whoever drinks wine, gives it to others to drink, sells it, buys it, presses it for another, transports it, receives it, or eats its price.”

Enormities (sins) include drinking wine in any form or other intoxicant, even if only a drop as in medicine; pressing out the juice to make wine or other intoxicant; carrying it for purposes of drinking, or having it carried; serving it to others or having it served; selling it; buying it; having it bought or sold; consuming proceeds from selling it; or keeping wine or other intoxicant. (o16.6 and w52.1(350-361))

Islamic Law And The Constitution: Are They Compatable?

The Islamists Challenge To The US Constitution

Translated Version Of The Consitution And Declaration Of Independence In Arabic

Muslims Concern Of Sharia Law In The United States

The Status Of Non-Muslim Minorities Under Islamic Rule

We Left Islam

Muslims Against Sharia Law

Friday, March 4, 2011

Why Create A Second Sharia Law Judicial System?

Why create a second judicial system in the United States?

In Texas, the state approved a Sharia Law court system. In Oklahoma, a November vote banned (SQ755) Sharia Law but then the attorney general and judge blocked the ban after the people voted against it.

Below there is information on what is happening in different states. Look at what devout muslim, Dr. M. Judhi Jasser said about the Oklahoma Ban on Sharia Law and what is happening in England. Second, listen to what Wafa Sultan had to say, who lived 30 years under Sharia Law. Third, take some time to understand Thomas jefferson's writings on the Constitution and church and state. He was a religious man but also conflicted because he understood what it meant to live under a big government, church and state regime. He understood the importance of putting a check and balance system on Congress and understood the importance of respecting religions without government interference.

An Article by Christine Brim below:

"A vote to confirm Elena Kagan’s nomination (Now United States New Supreme Court Judge) will bring a liberal, pro-Shariah justice to our highest Court. And if she is confirmed, her behavior as Obama’s Solicitor General indicates she will refuse to recuse herself on any Shariah-related decision but instead will lead the charge to legitimate Shariah law in America." (More on Kagan's record in the link)

To understand what is happening today, you need to take a look back at history.

Continue to educate each other.

Oklahoma Bans Sharia Law

Oklahoma Bans Sharia Law

Hearing On Sharia Law Set For Today

Unconstitutional Ban On Islamic Law In The US

Oklahoma's Ban Shariah Law Blocked

CAIR Exposed

What did Dr. M Juhdi Jasser, A devout Muslim, from American Islamic Forum For Democracy, have to say about the Oklahoma ban:

"SQ755 is not about religious freedom or minority rights. It is about the inviolable sanctity of the U.S. constitution and our country's foundational belief in a legal system based in one law that is based in reason and individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The law has no impact on the personal practice of Islam or the personal interpretation of "shariah" (God's law to a Muslim), but rather SQ755 focuses on shariah as a total legal system that the people of Oklahoma wanted to make clear shall not be used or respected systemically in deciding law in Oklahoma. CAIR's assertion that it is akin to France's ban of the hijab or personal head covering for women is absurd. There is no evidence that this law prevents any of the personal manifestation of the practice of Islam or the use of personal religious principles in arguing law based in reason in state or federal court. Shariah as a legal system can just not be used as prima facie evidence in court.

SQ755 also thus prevents the establishment of separate shariah or Islamic courts in Oklahoma. As we have seen in Britain, Islamists have transformed the British arbitration system to the point that they are operating upwards of 85 shariah courts now. These courts are mostly operated out of mosques in Britain. While they claim that the courts are voluntary, as Canadians voiced loudly in their rejection of shariah courts, these groups exploit tribal pressures and coercion within Muslim communities in order to circumvent the one law and one legal system of Britain and western nations. It is naïve and ignorant to believe that such courts are purely "voluntary". Just ask many of the women who get pressured through them and pressured to stay "out of western un-Islamic courts."

Full article is here:

Sharia Law Approved In Texas

Sharia Law Approved In The State Of Texas

Ever Heard Of Texas Islamic Courts

Islamic Tribunal Chosen Through Arbitration Clause

News Nationally

California Mosque Calls For Unity And Sharia

Time To Questions Sharia Law In Florida

Wellesly Massachusettes Public School Students Learn To Pray Allah

Sharia Comes To Michigan

Minnesota Under Attack From Sharia Law

Sharia Law Comes To New Jersey

Supreme Court, Elena Kagan And Sharia Law

What Is Sharia Law?

Definition :
The code of law derived from the Koran and from the teachings and example of Mohammed; "sharia is only applicable to Muslims"; "under Islamic law there is no separation of church and state"

Why Sharia Law Can Threaten America By Wafa Sultan
(Wafa Sultan lived for Three Decades Under Sharia Law In Syria)

Top Ten Reason Why Sharia Law Is Not Good For America

Islam: Governing Under Sharia

Thomas Jefferson, Wall Of Seperation And The Supreme Court

Judeo Christian Roots Of Americans Founding Ideals And Documents

Amendment 1 To The Constitution - Freedom Of Religion and Press

Jeffersons Wall Of Seperation Letter

"The unedited draft of the Danbury Baptist letter makes it clear why Jefferson drafted it: He wanted his political partisans to know that he opposed proclaiming fasts and thanksgivings, not because he was irreligious, but because he refused to continue a British practice that was an offense to republicanism. To emphasize his resolve in this matter, Jefferson inserted two phrases with a clenched-teeth, defiant ring: "wall of eternal separation between church and state" and "the duties of my station, which are merely temporal." These last words -- "merely temporal" -- revealed Jefferson's preoccupation with British practice. Temporal, a strong word meaning secular, was a British appellation for the lay members of the House of Lords, the Lords Temporal, as opposed to the ecclesiastical members, the Lords Spiritual. "Eternal separation" and "merely temporal" -- here was language as plain as Jefferson could make it to assure the Republican faithful that their "religious rights shall never be infringed by any act of mine."

Debate and Thomas Jeffersons Unedited Document Here:

Exploring Constitutional Conflict

1803 Marbury vs Madision, The First Supreme Court Desicion

The American Bar Association Undertakes The Fight For Sharia Law

The American Bar Association undertakes the fight for Sharia Law.

There needs to be a national debate on this subject.

On CBN News, Anjem Choudary had this to say: (Live Interview Below)
"You can't say that Islam is a religion of peace. Because Islam does not mean peace. Islam means submission."

On Sean Hannity, Anjem Choudary had this to say:
"You are worried because you know Islam is coming to your backyard. And you cannot tolerate that. The biggest criminals and the biggest murders today are not the Muslims."

Life Under Sharia Law in many countries. More detail available under Right Side News below:

"There is no freedom of religion. There is no freedom of speech. There is no freedom of thought. There is no freedom of artistic expression. There is no freedom of the press. There is no equality of peoples—a non-Muslim, a Kafir, is never equal to a Muslim. There is no equal protection under Sharia for different classes of people. Justice is dualistic, with one set of laws for Muslim males and different laws for women and non-Muslims. There are no equal rights for women. Women can be beaten.A non-Muslim cannot bear arms. There is no democracy, since democracy means that a non-Muslim is equal to a Muslim. The United States Constitution is a man-made document of ignorance, jahiliyah, that must submit to Sharia. Non-Muslims are dhimmis, third-class citizens. All governments must be ruled by Sharia law. Unlike common law, Sharia is not interpretive, nor can it be changed. There is no Golden Rule."

More Research Provided Under Sharia Law Section Of This Site.

Articles And Video Of The Week

The ABA's Jihad

Anjem Choudary: Islam Does Not Mean Peace. Islam Means Submission

Why Sharia Law Can Threaten America By Wafa Sultan
Wafa Sultan lived for Three Decades Under Sharia Law In Syria)

Sharia Law In The News

Sharia Law For The Non-Muslim

ABA: The Islamic Finance Committee

Who Is Anjem Chaudary

Dvorak: Muslim Sharia Law For America? March Third, A Protest For Shariah Law?

Protesters Express Disdain For Sharia Law

Friday, February 25, 2011

A Politician Said The "Taxpayers Should Be Heard"

This is a first time in decades a politician said, "The taxpayer has a right to be heard." Then passes legislation that puts the taxpayer first and not a special interest group. Unbelievable!! It is a step.

Now, if all interest groups that pay taxes like all taxpayers were concerned taxpayers, then there would be no protesting and Scott Walker can balance the budget and help individuals keep their jobs everywhere, including public service jobs. Make sense?!? So, wouldn't it make sense to take special interests out of politics both union, non-union, and the classroom so politicians can do their job, under the Constitution, and take care of all people not just one group? Yes, I know this is a stretch. Is it possible?

If you think about it, the special interest unions (not all unions) protested against the taxpayers this week. Interesting thought.

Video Of The Week

Americas Governor, The Taxpayer Has A right To Be Heard

Article Of The Week

Wis. Passes A Bill Taking Away Union Rights

Michigan Public Employee Relation Act:
Public Sector Labor Laws And Its Consequences

Civics 101: Lesson For Elected Representatives

Other Union News

Public Unions Force Taxpayers To Fund Dems

Taxpayers Helped Fund Both Sides Of The Labor Negotiations

Finally, Hope For The Taxpayer

How Taxpayers Fund Politics

Friday, February 18, 2011

Governor Scott Walker In Wisconsin

Well, I think the world is on fire. The world is going crazy in the middle east and now here in the United States. Does anyone have a huge hose to put out all the fires? WOW!! Where to begin.....

America, take a close look. Wisconsin is a Forced Unionism State that is $3.7 billion in the budget hole. Mainly, because they spent to much and excepted too many loans from the Federal Government. This past November election voters voted in new legislatures to focus on balancing the budget. There is a bigger story. It is a very bold move by Governor Scott Walker to introduce and vote soon on Right To Work Legislation that focuses on possibly repealing collective bargaining in the state. This is unprecendented since Wisconsin is one of the first states to become a forced Unionism state. If this passes, then Wisconson becomes a Right To Work State.

All Governor Scott Walker wants to do is have the state goverment and public employees to pay, a small portion, into their benefits. That alone takes the burden off of the taxpayer. Some union groups just do not see it that way. As of today the taxpayers, pay Wisconsins salaries, pensions, and benefits. That is one of the reasons why Wisconsin is BROKE.

Do the people protesting really know why they are protesting? What is happening in Wisconsin is not going to be "sunshine and lollypops". This is going to get ugly because the United States is in a financial crossroads. There will be alot of missinformation in the news and on main street. Hopefully, individuals will continue to do their own homework and understand what Scott Walker is trying to accomplish. That is balancing the budget, since that is his job. The bill, Scott Walker is proposing, helps every single person keep their public service jobs. No one will have to lose their jobs under this bill. The union are saying, NO WAY. Fascinating.

Mark Mix from Right To Work Foundations explains in detail what is really happening within the state of Wisconsin with Unions.

For those who are still unsure of YOUR rights under Constitutional Law of the United States, the link is provided for you as well.

Videos Of The Week

New Right To Work Foundation Podcast: The Truth About What Is Happening In Wisconsin


Wisconsin Governor Walker Proposes Curbs On Union Benefits

Scott Walker Budget Question And Answer

Articles Of The Week

Rep. Ziegelbauer On The Truth Of What is Happening In Wisconsin

Jet Insiders Opinion On Unions Receiving $22,000 A Year In Benefits On The Back Of the Taxpayer

Haslam Proposal Could Wreck Teachers Union Monopoly On Education

Other Unions News

Wisconsin Vs Big Labor

Wisconsins Teachers Salary

Wisconsin State Government Salaries

16 Lawmakers Stay Away From Public Workers Bill

Wis. Gov: "I Took Bold Political Move On Budget"

Unions Concerns About Scott Walkers Bill

What Democrats Are Saying About Scott Walkers Bill

The Assault On The American Worker In Wisconsin Is Beginning

Friday, February 11, 2011

Elizabeth Warren And The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

What is happening in Egypt and abroad is important. This week I want to spend a little time on the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that will be launched on July 10th of this year run by Elizabeth Warren.

I will never understand why we have to create a new agency to regulate the mortgage industry and derivatives market when the administration will not even take the time to address Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the GSE's where all the crisis began. It is the end user that will feel the regulatory effects even more. But I digress for a moment.

The Frank-Dodd Financial Overhaul Bill not only launches new regulation on the derivatives and the mortgage industry but it creates the new agency called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Clea Benson from Bloomsberg Business Week descibes a potential outcome of this new agency :

"FiSCA's members, largely regulated at the state level until now, handle about $106 billion a year in transactions for more than 30 million customers and are hoping to take even more market share from traditional banks. The new consumer agency, which has the power to write rules that would mandate repayment terms and force disclosures of loan costs, may determine whether they succeed or fail. Ed D'Alessio, general counsel for FiSCA, says the move to Washington was "necessary to meet the increased level of regulation that's coming down the pike."

While the Dodd-Frank law established the broad outlines of a new regulatory landscape, federal agencies are now writing at least 330 new rules governing everything from derivatives trading to the mortgage industry. Decisions being made at the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, and other agencies will not just ordain how companies must act. They'll also determine which ones are dealt into moneymaking opportunities created by Dodd-Frank—and which are shut out."

I am more concerned about about the unintended consequences of all of the new regulation on the end user. What could happen to the homebuyers when they buy or sell property under all of the new regulation? This past week I found an article by Ric Thom from Note Investor, it was an interesting read

Be aware.

Videos Of The Week

Woodruff Interview With Elizabeth Warren

George Soros Time For US To Get Used To The New World Order

Article Of The Weeks

Far From Over: Battle Over Dood-Frank Implementation New Fault Line In 2011

Mortgage Market In The News

8 Keys To 2011s Mortgage Market

Making The Most Of Dodd-Frank

Dodd-Frank Hijacks Owner Financing

Lawmakers Raise Concerns About The Consumer Agency

Letter To Members Of Congress Calling For An Increase In Funding To The SEC And The CFTC

Davis Polk Summary Of Dodd-Frank Financial Bill

HR 4173 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform And Consumer Protection Act

Saturday, February 5, 2011

The Internet: The Debate Continues

The Internet: The Debate Continues

Three Sections:

1. Three bills working its way through Congress. HR96 keeps FCC regulation off the internet. S3480 creates a new agency and implements new regulation for the internet and potentially a kill switch. National Strategy For Trusted Identities creates a government national internet ID.

2. Government Media and Internet Blackout in many countries.

3. Debunking Net Neutrality advocates. One countries Net Neutrality is different from another country. The United States internet framework surpasses all countries.

Internet Legislation

HR96 - The Internet Freedom Act (protects Free Market Open Source Internet)

S3480 - Protecting Cyberspace As A National Asset Act (Creates a new Federal Agency and called by many the "Internet Kill Switch")

National Strategy For Trusted Identities In Cyberspace

Video Of The Week

Will Net Neutrality Save The Internet?
(What the internet looks like today without government regulation)

Articles Of The Week

Brown Spector Opinion on Subsidies, Net Neutrality, and Government Regulation

Net Neutrality Is Already Here, Regulation Open Sourced By Technology

Senate Internet Kill Switch Moves Forward,2817,2365709,00.asp

Senate Proposal Tries To Protect Cyberspace

Cyberspace Protection

International Internet and Media News

Internet Kill Switch

Regime Throws Information Blackout Over Egypt

China May "Seek To Control" The Internet US Report On Web Hijacking

Press Blackout In Tunisia

SSC Renews Press Blackout Case In Jordon

Internet Technology: A Tool For Political Change In Arab Countries

Net Neutrality In Other Countries

International Network Neutrality and Korea

Chile: First Country To Legislate Net Neutrality

What Net Neutrality Mean In Uzbejistan

Declaration Of The Committee Minister On Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality: Where Does India Stand

Friday, February 4, 2011

FCC And Net Neutrality

FCC In The News

Net Neutrality has been a hot topic this year. FCC, who does not have the authority to regulate the internet, is going to regulate it anyway through new Net Neutrality Rules this Dec 21st 2010 after Congress has gone home and the courts have shut down for the Holiday. Thanks to the hard work of Seton Motley of, he has created a detailed video summary of what Net Neutrality will mean to you and why you should care about what the FCC is doing. The video is below.

More importantly, there is a solution. There are many petitions pushing back against against the net Neutrality Rules. Since, we know FCC is going to push these new rules whether you like it or not, then this is what you can have Congress do in the first 60 days in session this January 2011 that will help stop the FCC.

Please feel free to copy, paste, modify, educate, and please forward on.............

Letter To Congress

It is my understanding that Julius Genachowski, Chairman of the FCC is pushing Net Neutrality Rules, to address what he calls "Broadband Issues". Scott Cleland, Chairman of says,
"If the FCC changes the way it treats high-speed Internet, then everybody in the industry would sue. It would be like an 8.0 earthquake under the sector," he adds. "Hundreds of billions of dollars have been invested (in broadband) in the belief that there'd be a market rate of return, not a regulated rate." .
A court decision back in April of this year sided with Comcast that the "FCC does not have the Authority under the current regulatory scheme to Regulate the internet."

Yet, without any Constitutional authority, the FCC, under the cover of darkness is going to regulate the internet whether we like it or not......

To preserve that the Free Market and Free Speech exists on the Internet, in the first 60 days of the new Congress on January 2011 support The Congressional Review Act,

"This is the text of the Congressional Review Act, a part of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, also called the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996. The Congressional Review Act allows Congress to review every new federal regulation issued by the government agencies and, by passage of a joint resolution, overrule a regulation."

Restrain the FCC's over-reaching authority, called "Net Neutrality", of the Internet. All you need is thirty senator signatures and it gets this issue to the floor. I know this can not be filibustered. Find 47 Republicans and 4 Democrats to support this and overrule FCC's regulation that will effect free speech and Free Market over the Internet within 60 days.

My friends and colleagues will be following this issue closely.

End Of Letter

Copy and paste Here (or modify)

Video of The Week

Seton Motley On Why You Should Care About Net Neutrality
(Detailed Summary of what can happen if Net Neutrality is implemented)

Article Of The Week

Congressional Review Act

The FCC Does Not Have The Authority To Regulate The Internet

Architectural Censorship And The FCC

Free Press Makes Two Million Mistakes On Net Neutrality

Courts Rule Against FCC's Comcast Net Neutrality Decision

FCC In the News

FCC Endorses Usage Based Internet Pricing

FCC Unveils Updated Net Neutrality Rules,2817,2373670,00.asp

FCC Wants To Test Public Value Of Every Public Broad Cast Station

FCC's Christmas Gift Net Neutrality

Wave Goodbye To Internet Freedom

Time To Shut Down The FCC

FCC To Propose Plans For Net Neutrality

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

The Lochner Era

Before President Roosevelt's New Deal Era of 1937 to today, there was the Lochner Era.

During the Lochner Era, The Court System defended individual's rights against Government Encroachment.

The Supreme Court Case that sealed Lochner Era in history and is still debated in courtrooms and in universities today is Lochner vs New York.

Short Summary:
In Lochner vs New York, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a New York Law that limited the number of hours a baker could work. That is what a New York Legislature attempted. The court held that the "state had no reasonable ground for interfering with liberty by determing the hours of labor for individuals who are free to work as they choose." It found that the law interfered with freedom of contract. It did not serve as a valid police power, and it thus violated the fourteenth amendment's Due Process Claus because it took away property without a trial.

For three decades, the Lochner decision following 1905, almost two hundred state laws that regulated price, labor, and maximum or minumum hours were declared unconstitutional as violating the Due Process Claus of the fourteenth amendment. This decision serves as the yard marker in the ideological battle between the free market Natural Law orginalists and the New Deal regulatory state Positivists.
Below, you will find links that give different points a of view of the Lochner Case during Roosevelts New Deal Era.

What is the 1905 Liberty Of Contract?

Liberty Of Contract-Freedom of choice-is protected by the fourteenth Amendments Due Process Claus is called "Substantive Due Process." "Substantive" means that the fourteenth amendment safeguards more than ones procedural rights to due process under the law, and that any government attempts to legislate away one's natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is strictly prohibited. Put another way, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are themselves protected, not just the means or procedure that the government must use if it wants to take them away.

Lochner vs The People Of State Of New York

The Fourteenth Amendment

What is the Due Process Claus?

A review of some Lochner Case Debates After Roosevelts's New Deal Implementation

Abstract: Plessy VS Lochner: The Berea College Case

A Tale Of Two Lochners

David A Bernstein on Cass Susstein and The Lochner Era

1985: Columbia Review: Cass Susstein: The Lochner Legacy

2003: Bush Court Nominee That Wants to Roll Back The New Deal

2009: Justice Holmes And The Empty Constitution

2009: Overcoming Lochner in The 21st Century