Time: Wed Jan 29 17:14:50 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA18883;
	Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:53:40 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:53:16 -0500 (EST)
	id sma026938; Wed Jan 29 13:52:51 1997
Originator: map@mapinc.org
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
To: pmitch@primenet.com
Subject: "The Lawless Rehnquist"

>Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 01:24:40 -0800
>From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
>Subject: "The Lawless Rehnquist"
>
>[This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>
>
>                     "The Lawless Rehnquist"
>
>                               by
>
>                         John E. Trumane
>                        January 28, 1997
>                       All Rights Reserved
>
>
>     William H.  Rehnquist is  a lawless man.  In a lecture today
>at the  University of  Arizona's Law School, the Chief Justice of
>the U.S.  Supreme Court  admitted that  federal judges  should be
>punished for  serious crimes,  like tax  evasion.  A student then
>drew his  attention to the Supreme Court's decision in 1920 which
>immunized those  judges from income taxes.  The U.S. Constitution
>specifically guarantees  that their  pay shall  not be diminished
>during their  continuance in  office.   Rehnquist  then  replied,
>"There has  been a  change in  doctrine."  The class has now been
>barred from  discussing any  contemporary issues,  on orders from
>the Law School's Dean of Academic Affairs.
>
>     What doctrines, if any, have changed to justify this lawless
>result?   Perhaps the  most pernicious,  and least  understood of
>these  new   doctrines,  is   the  stealthy  destruction  of  the
>principles of  freedom.   At the  turn of  the century,  the U.S.
>Supreme Court  issued a  series of  pathetic decisions called The
>Insular  Cases.     Briefly,   the  high  Court  ruled  that  the
>Constitution of  the United  States, as  such,  does  not  extend
>beyond the limits of the States which are united by and under it.
>Later, in  1945, under  cover of  the first nuclear war on planet
>earth, the  high Court  extended this doctrine by ruling that the
>guarantees of  the Constitution  extend to the federal zone, only
>as Congress makes those guarantees applicable, by statutes.
>
>     The federal  zone is  the area  of land  over which Congress
>exercises exclusive  legislative jurisdiction.   These  are areas
>which are  under the  American flag,  yet they are not within the
>boundaries of  any  particular  State.    They  are  territories,
>possessions and  federal enclaves,   like military bases.  Recent
>research has  proven, conclusively,  that  the  Internal  Revenue
>Code, the set of laws used to collect the income tax, can only be
>enforced within the federal zone, and upon citizens of that zone.
>A Congresswoman  has even  admitted as much, in 1996, on official
>stationery from  the House of Representatives in Washington, D.C.
>This discovery is consistent with the doctrine established in The
>Insular Cases, of which Downes v. Bidwell is the most notorious.
>
>     In his discussion of John Marshall's immense contribution to
>the history  of the U.S. Supreme Court, the Chief Justice made an
>important point  of discussing the role of dissenting opinions by
>other members of the high Court.  When queried about contemporary
>practices, however,  the Chief Justice deferred the matter to the
>end of  the class.  It was then that the Dean of Academic Affairs
>explained that  contemporary practices  would be  off-limits,  on
>orders from Rehnquist.
>
>     Is the Chief Justice becoming a bit sensitive about dissent,
>particularly when  those dissenters sit beside him, and decide to
>oppose him?  Consider, for a moment, the words of Justice Harlan,
>whose brilliant  dissent in  Downes v. Bidwell has already earned
>him a permanent place of well deserved honor in American history.
>Listen to  Harlan explain  why the  slim 5-to-4  majority in that
>case was wrong, flat wrong.  Quoting now:
>
>     "The idea  prevails with some -- indeed, it found expression
>in arguments  at  the  bar  --  that  we  have  in  this  country
>substantially and  practically two national governments;  one, to
>be  maintained   under  the   Constitution,  with   all  of   its
>restrictions;  the other to be maintained by Congress outside and
>independently of  that instrument,  by exercising  such powers as
>other nations of the earth are accustomed to exercise.
>
>     "I take  leave to  say that if the principles thus announced
>should ever  receive the  sanction of a majority of this court, a
>radical and  mischievous change  in our system of government will
>be the  result.   We will,  in that  event, pass  from the era of
>constitutional  liberty   guarded  and  protected  by  a  written
>constitution into an era of legislative absolutism.
>
>     "It will  be an  evil day for American liberty if the theory
>of a  government outside  of the  supreme law  of the  land finds
>lodgment in  our constitutional  jurisprudence.   No higher  duty
>rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent
>all violation of the principles of the Constitution."  See Downes
>v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901), Harlan dissenting.
>
>     And so,  against these  immensely moving words, we judge the
>Chief Justice  to be  a lawless  radical, bent  on destroying the
>very constitution  which he  is sworn  to uphold.  When presented
>with  clear  authority  that  federal  judges  cannot  be  taxed,
>including a  seminal decision  in 1920 which upheld the immunity,
>notwithstanding the  16th Amendment, Rehnquist glibly states that
>there has  been a  "change in  doctrine" [sic].   How  wonderful!
>What he  is saying,  in effect,  is that  the Supreme  Court  has
>aggrandized to  itself the  baseless power  to  invent  doctrines
>according as the wind should blow, not according to the wishes of
>the very People who ordained and established the Constitution for
>the United States of America, the People whom he should serve.
>
>     The net  result is low fascism, and it is high time we faced
>the terrible truth about our lawless government leaders.
>
>     For fascism arrives without fanfare, like tooth decay or dry
>rot, behind  closed walls,  until the  very foundation  is washed
>away, forever.   This  author received  today proof  that federal
>judges are now being blackmailed.  In the 1930's, newly appointed
>federal judges  were forced  to sign  contracts agreeing  to  the
>income tax, or they simply were not appointed.  Despite the clear
>and established  immunity against  taxation of their pay, federal
>judges are  now  being  presented  with  the  following  criminal
>choice:   either agree  in  writing  to  waive  your  fundamental
>immunity, or  forget about  serving as  a federal  judge.  Forget
>about integrity;   forget  about judicial  independence;   forget
>about justice.   You  may attain  the lofty title of Justice, but
>you will enjoy that title in name only.
>
>     It is  no wonder  that well in excess of 80% of the American
>People are  now disgusted with government, and all of its agents.
>Our Chief  Justice is  clearly a  criminal  if  he  continues  to
>advocate taxation  of federal judges, in the face of supreme laws
>which maintain  the contrary.   Federal  judges  are  also  heavy
>investors in  the United  States Prison Industries, now the fifth
>largest enterprise  of the  whole American  economy.  Need we say
>any more?   Yes,  we need  to say more, because the incarceration
>rate in  the land of the free is now the highest in the world, by
>wide margins.   You  can thank  William  H.  Rehnquist  for  that
>honorable distinction.  None will dare to call it treason.
>
>
>                             #  #  #
>

====================================================================
[Text is usually formatted in Courier 11 non-proportional spacing @]
[65-characters per line; .DOCs by MS-WORD for MS-DOS, Version 5.0B.]
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., email address: pmitch@primenet.com
Web site for the Supreme Law Firm  is URL: http://www.supremelaw.com      
Ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state [We win]
We can decode all your byte streams, spaghetti code notwithstanding.
Coming soon: "Manifesto for a Republic" by John E. Trumane ie JetMan
====================================================================

      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail