One
of the seven judicial violations
listed in the J.A.I.L. Amendment
is "Blocking of a lawful
conclusion of a case."
Not only does the judiciary
block the rights of the
People, but so does the
legislature of too many
states.
Ever since the South Dakota
J.A.I.L. campaign started,
we've been hearing more
from our readers in the
non-initiative states than
from others. People in the
initiative states realize
that it is just a question
of funding to collect the
required signatures for
the J.A.I.L. Initiative,
and the initiative process
will take care of getting
J.A.I.L. on the ballot if
the required signatures
have been certified. So
the ball in those states
is in the People's hands.
However, such is not the
case with People living
in the non-initiative (NI)
states which amounts to
slightly more than half
of all states. These states
include Texas and New
York-- two of our largest
states. People in NI
states are hit with a "double
whammy." Before they
can present J.A.I.L. to
the public and convince
them of the need for J.A.I.L.
in their state, they must
first present J.A.I.L. to
their legislature and convince
their legislators of the
need for J.A.I.L. in their
state. Now when it comes
to the J.A.I.L. Amendment,
this disparity between initiative
and non-initiative states
is a problem of paramount
proportion.
Unlike other measures, J.A.I.L.
epitomizes the inherent
right of the People --ALL
People-- to alter or reform
their government whensoever
they --the People, not the
legislators-- deem it necessary
to do so. People living
in NI states are not second-class
citizens. The right is theirs
as much as for others. The
right to alter or reform
government doesn't come
from government-- it isn't
a "privilege"
granted by government. The
fact that some state governments
are honest enough to acknowledge
that inherent right in the
People by stating it in
the state Constitution,
doesn't mean that it is
thereby granted by that
government. The word "inherent"
is used (or its equivalent)
which means existing as
a matter of nature --not
government.
When the Founder of J.A.I.L.
first presented the measure
for filing with the California
Secretary of State in 1996
(it was then known as "The
Judicial Reform Act of 1996"),
among the questions
by the Legislative Analyst
was this final one:
"Mr. Branson, if, as
your initiative states,
'no judge under the jurisdiction
of the Special Grand Jury,
or potentially affected
by the outcome of a challenge
hereto, shall have any jurisdiction
to sit in judgment of such
challenge,' then whom do
you propose should sit in
judgment? A judge
from another state or a
federal judge?"
Ron responded by telling
him that he was not there
to advise the state on how
to defeat the measure, but
that he cites the authority
for presenting the measure:
"All political power
is inherent in the people.
Government is instituted
for their protection, security,
and benefit, and they have
the right to alter or reform
it when the public good
may require." Article
II, Sec. 1, California Constitution.
There were no further questions.
Clearly that stated the
authority for J.A.I.L. But
California is an initiative
state. What authority is
given for the NI states?
It is the same authority
as that acknowledged --not
granted-- by California!
The statement "All
political power is inherent
in the people" acknowledges
a truth that is self-evident
under the laws of nature.
It doesn't depend on the
state, or any state. Furthermore,
California's acknowledgement
that the people "have
the right to alter or reform
[government] when the public
good may require" is
based on the acknowledgement
that "Government is
instituted for [the people's]
protection, security, and
benefit."
Those facts are true in
all states.
- All political power
is inherent in the People;
- Government is instituted
by the People for their
protection and benefit;
- Therefore the People
have the right to alter
or reform government
when they deem it necessary
to do so.
It is a common belief of
government officials that
they are better able to
determine what's "good"
for the People than are
the People themselves. Officials
think that's what they get
paid for. However, that
is a dangerous fallacy that
creates the usurpation of
power by government.
Government's responsibility
is NOT to protect the People
(as we constantly hear on
world news reports), but
to protect the rights of
the People. Our physical
being isn't as important
as is our rights to the
benefit and protection our
being. People are not dumb
cattle that require the
protection of their being
by a superior human authority,
like a rancher over a herd
of cows. The difference
is that People are human
beings with inherent rights
by nature, including the
right to institute government
for the protection of their
rights --not of their being--
and thereby have the concomitant
inherent right to alter
or reform that government
when it ceases to protect
their rights.
This is the point that must
be made to the state governments
of the NI states. This point
is more fundamental than
even J.A.I.L. in the first
instance, because the People cannot
present J.A.I.L. without
a mechanism in place for
them to do so in exercise
of their inherent right
to alter or reform government
(in this case, the judicial
system) since their rights
are no longer being protected
by that system.
At first we said that we
should concentrate on getting
J.A.I.L. passed in the initiative
states first, and then have
better leverage to convince
the legislatures in the
NI states to do the same
thing. But with the barrage
of emails we've been receiving
from our readers of the
NI states, the question
arises, Why should those
People have to wait to get
J.A.I.L. passed in their
states? That's about half
the people, or more, in
this country!
Since it is the initiative
process that is well established
for the passing of state
constitutional amendments
by the People in approximately
half the states, then it
would appear that the People
of NI states would have
to present jointly with
the proposed J.A.I.L. Amendment,
sufficient signatures also
to pass an initiative process
(I would think the same
number of signatures for
each-- it's 8% of the voters
in the previous gubernatorial
election in California.
It may be 10% in some states).
But, the People must take
the initiative (pun intended).
We've had some of our JICs
in the NI states give up,
or JAILers not even become
JICs in the first place,
in those states, because
of the unlikelihood of convincing
the legislature to introduce
the J.A.I.L. Bill as written
(copywrited by the Author),
due to their conflict of
interest. It isn't the province
of government to alter or
reform itself. It won't
happen, nor can we expect
it to.
The People of each NI state
has to decide how best to
go about making it possible
to get J.A.I.L. on their
ballot. We don't micromanage
the states, and so please
don't ask us what you should
do. We can publish suggestions
by our readers to share
with the JAILers as we have
started to do, but that's
all we can do. If some of
you find some good methods
in your state, pass them
along to us and we'll send
them to the JAILers. J.A.I.L.
is a national team and we
need all of us to make it
work! It's up to
you!
-Barbie-
victoryusa@jail4judges.org
J.A.I.L.- Judicial
Accountability Initiative
Law -
www.jail4judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at
P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood,
CA 91603
See our active flash,
http://www.jail4judges.org/national_001.htm
JAIL is a unique addition
to our form of gov't. heretofore
unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is
dynamic! JAIL is America's
ONLY hope!
E-Group sign on at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at
JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To be added or removed,
write to
VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
Your help is needed:
www.SouthDakotaJudicialAccountability.com
"..it does not require
a majority to prevail, but
rather an irate, tireless
minority keen to set brush
fires in people's minds.."
- Samuel Adams
"There are a thousand
hacking at the branches
of evil to one who is
striking at the root."--
Henry David Thoreau