Are we in the last days of the Supreme Court? Replace it with what? Tyrannical Mandates mis-using USSC opinions

Spread the love

Dr Brunswick speaks out against the communist takeover. Source links are at the bottom of this article.

Legal experts and commentators everywhere have been hinting at the US Supreme Court is about to come to an end. At least they’ve long lost credibility. For a while the court was deemed inappropriate by conservatives, and now also the liberals can’t seem to find room for them anylonger.

I think such people are going way too far. The question is really just about how their opinions are considered / interpreted and applied which are often highly inappropriate.

For example, if the Supreme Court said that a divergent and immoral practice was considered a constitutional right under the constitution, would that automatically give the Army an immediate mandate to shoot any parents who simply disagreed? Most people would say absolutely not!

However, something like that did happen. In the 1960s in the integration of schools, some verbage of the Supreme Court regarding a case for one student was hijacked to apply to any state, no matter what their state laws were, to invade and send in the military to shoot to kill anyone who would exercise the “freedom of assembly” and “freedom of association”. Some parents were bayonetted as a result of the US President’s orders to send in the national guard to force an integration in schools. This set a precedent of abusing Supreme Court opinions for many years to come.

However most scholars of the law knew such should be challenged within the system (courts etc) for example the state laws regarding double homicide of an pregnant woman miscarried due to violence. It is still law on the books of nearly every state (and federal) that if a man hit a woman in the stomach and the unborn baby dies, they must be charged with homicide charges of murder. If the mother also died in the proces then it’s a double murder according to Federal law.

However while the small opinion on abortion in Roe vs Wade didn’t address the murder laws, still some have assumed they cannot challenge the courts in this area. Too many people have not brought these cases to the Supreme Court. However many States did convict people of double homicides so it wouldn’t need to be appealed that high up.

The USA Supreme Court could still pass the buck even regarding Roe vs Wade so that they don’t take the blame for the mis-interpretation and mis-application of their opinions. None of their opinions were supposed to override state laws. As we know USC Article 4 section 4 etc says the Federal Govt are to guarantee each state it’s own full state Republican government to equally be recognized with it’s own National sovereignty as a true state, with the power in the people of each state, in contrary of a foreign central system or practice of any other state.

The Supreme Court opinions have never been intended to grant a US President unlimited powers of any surrounding matter to interpret that opinion to now be a green light to violate state laws at all. Not to mention sending the National Guard to kill parents who simply believed they were endorsing morality for their children. This did happen in the 60s with the integration of the schools. In Little Rock Arkansas the army bayonetted some parents who were peacefully protesting according to numerous laws, especially on the weight of the constitution. Someone should have taken their murders to the supreme court, and this would have been properly handled and an opinion could have prevented it from happening again (so the USC would say). However the system is too slow for any of this. They would need a dozen other cases to reach the Supreme Court to make up for this disrespect for the weight of the Constitution to violate state sovereignties and state laws. This has been the military dictatorship practice since the civil war, so that a few families can profit in their offshore businesses. It would all be solved when state’s rights were restored and never violated again. When a State’s sovereignty is so easily trampled it opens the door for all this other kind of lawlessness. The system is missing such an enforcement of these true freedoms. Their opinions aren’t to be interpreted as catch-all Edicts for a military dictatorship to go out and kill American citizen parents on any point that doesn’t smell like some of the verbage in some interpretation of one of their opinions. That then is mob rule. However in a Republic there are laws, state laws that are inviolate.

It would be a great day when the US State Republics are restored back into freedom to have self representation and follow their own Christian laws. Yes as 99% of the population were Christian of course it would be Christian. Especially when all accounts of the present Constitution says our only union is the ones mentioned in our Articles of Union and Perpetual Confederation. Perpetual meaning pre-existing Christian Confederation of pre-existing states. These states did make new contracts when they elevated into a new post British government. However the original Confederation as adopted by all states in the union had also from 1637 and before a text that they were a pre-existing Christian Confederacy who have “one and the same aim: advancement of the kingdom of Jesus Christ and maintaining the purity of the gospel”, and granted today’s constitution still says that union (of Christians) is being perfected. Which meant as it was till the 1965 immigration act, anyone who improperly got US Citizenship were stripped of Citizenship (which on many cases included any non-Caucasian who wasn’t a natural born in America) couldn’t immigrate or become naturalized. Many states had laws that no other races could immigrate to their states also, and Native American Indians had their own self-representative states and lands (often bigger than what whites had) as was what they wanted most appropriately.

It means all the laws that were illegally usurped will be restored, for example the state sodomy laws calling all forms of homosexuality a felony, (struck down in 2003) would again restore the acts to be a felony, and the open racketeering companies openly conspiring to commit pedophilia will no longer be classified as “safety indoctrination” but will again be called a felony of pedophilia.

Interracial marriage (as was illegal in 48 states, mostly till 1968) would again be restored as a felony, and so many other state laws for true Christian freedom, will once again be restored.

May God be praised for the Christian nationalistic laws of our American forefathers. I pray they all get restored and the illegal central usurpation via vague supreme court opinions no longer have precedence to steam roll over such. For example it’s taken far too long for that broken system to address Roe vs Wade, which never was intended to legalize abortion, just as Loving vs Virginia was never intended (by any) to remove the felony criminal penalties on interracial marriage, and has taken far too long to get addressed in the present system, as the Supreme Court themselves would have expected it to be addressed and not neglected for so long. How long in this slow system of dis-respecting the state’s rights for their own taxation and own self-representation, for their rule of law, for their own normal state sovereignty, and stop being usurped by a foreign (often illegal) unchallenged mob rule of a foreign military dictatorship (as the Federal reserve is owned by the same revolutionary families responsible for all the horrible socialist, and primarily atheist and marxist wars that we know).

We’re thinking about becoming more active on quora. What do you think? Would that be a good move?