From: Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:03:07 +0800
To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Subject: Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd)
Message-ID: <199712291621.KAA01960@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



Forwarded message:

> From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii@invweb.net>
> Date: Mon, 29 Dec 97 09:17:55 -0600
> Subject: Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd)

> Well you can only sue the state that has caused some form of direct damage
> against you.

Really? Where is that in the Constitution? I can't sue a state or the
federal government on an issue of process or procedure unless I *personaly*
have been effected? Malarky. The simple fact that I am a citizen that
*could* be effected is sufficient grounds to file. Especialy considering the
detailing of authority in the 10th.

If this were so I would not be able to file against a law regulating, for
example, a religion unless I happen to be a participant of that religion.
This is clearly not constitutional since any law threating a single
religion by extension can and does threaten all religious freedom in the
country.

> If both Texas and Alaska are doing somthing Unconstitutional
> but Texas is the only one who has directly caused damage then you should
> only be able to sue Texas.

Why? If both states are participating in an illegal action - such as
complying with unconstitutional federal regulations - then even a single
state in which I *don't* reside nor have *ever* been in is a clear threat to
my constitutional rights.  Remember the feds are *required* to guarantee a
constitutional government in *all* states and that all priviliges and
immunitites be recognized by those states - irrespective of my current
geographic location. Now if we accept the argument that the 14th extends my
federal rights to the states then the wrongful action and its application is
even more clearly relevant. However, the 14th is not necessary for this to
be the case.

(thankfuly, since one of my claims is that rights are not equivalent to
priviliges or immunities)

It is the precedence and not the personal application that is
unconstitutional.

> I think that in the majority of
> cases one will find that a greviance will be limited to a single state (I
> think it would be very rare to find a case where all 50 states had
> directly caused damage against an individule).

- Illegal taxation and the compliance of the states in turning over money
  illegaly

- regulation and prohibition of firearms and the states complicancy
  in breaking the 2nd.

- the provisioning and support of military operations relating to the
  Army and Air Force (which is unconstitutional unless part of the Army
  or Navy) for more than 2 year terms.

- the failure of the US govt. to train and arm the militia in the several
  states

- the various federal regulations limiting consensual crimes contrary
  to the letter and spirit of the 9th and 10th.

- the abrogation of the states duties as equals to the federal govt.
  and their duties as a part of the checks and balances of the
  Constitution.

And as a matter of course most other issues resting on Constitutional
jurisdiction involving the willing compliance of state government.

> An example of this would be back in the 50's with the forced segregation
> laws. If you were living in Georga and wished to bring suit against the
> state for violating your rights you would be limited to only suing Georga
> even though AL,FL,SC,NC,TX,AR, all had the same laws on the books.

Nobody that I can find has *ever* even tried to do this so how can it be
undoable? It's a pity there wasn't some young turk back then to give it a
shot - course there doesn't seem to be any young turks now willing to do it
either...;(

Now, if I can figure a way around the Supreme Courts 3 year requirement...



    ____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                    |
   |      Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make       |
   |      violent revolution inevitable.                                |
   |                                                                    |
   |                                          John F. Kennedy           |
   |                                                                    |
   |                                                                    | 
   |            _____                             The Armadillo Group   |
   |         ,::////;::-.                           Austin, Tx. USA     |
   |        /:'///// ``::>/|/                     http://www.ssz.com/   |
   |      .',  ||||    `/( e\                                           |
   |  -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-                         Jim Choate       |
   |                                                 ravage@ssz.com     |
   |                                                  512-451-7087      |
   |____________________________________________________________________|