It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


POLITICS: Constitution Restoration Act of 2004

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 02:14 AM
There is currently a bill which has been submitted to Congress and the Senate that is threatening to turn America into a theocracy. If passed, The Constitution Restoration Act, would stop the Supreme Court, from reviewing any legal action brought against any government representative "by reason of the element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty or government" under threat of impeachment,

"Supporters of the bill cite Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which authorizes Congress to limit the jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts.

Touted by some supporters as one of the most important pieces of legislation in U.S. history, the bill states:

The Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government."

The bill will also retroactively nullify,
"Any decision of a Federal court which has been made prior to or after the effective date of this Act, to the extent that the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal added by this Act, is not binding precedent on any State court."

The church-state arguments are clear but there's another threat which I think needs to be recognized also. The section of the bill that ought to make everyone, even the Religious Right, take notice, is found in sec.201.

It limits the sources which courts may reference when interpreting and applying the Constitution of the United States. At first glance it may look like a good idea since it says judges cannot base their decisions on anything but the constitution and common law. Then read the last line,

"...a court of the United States may not rely upon any constitution, law, administrative rule, Executive order, directive, policy, judicial decision, or any other action of any foreign state or international organization or agency, other than English constitutional and common law."

Isn't England a foreign state? For some reason I have been under the impression that the US gained it's independence after the Revolutionary War. Does anyone else find this disturbing?

Full Text of HR 3799 IH

Related Stories:
a foreign view:
an opposing view:
an advocate's view:

[Edited on 1-4-2004 by Banshee]

posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 04:12 AM
the two bills (the one in house and senate) have slightly different wording on the 201 section.

one says constitutional law and english common law, the other says English constitutional law and and common law.
(the one that says english constitutional law and common law)
(the one that says english common law, constitutional law)

weird , i wonder what the difference is??

and im alittle confused about the part that says whether operating in offical capacity. does that mean that a element or person can do something beyond their capacity and not be able to be reviewed for it?

[Edited on 2004-4-1 by NuTroll]

posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 07:31 AM
now add this to the patriot acts, the 5th circut court ruling about warrentless searches, and searching of a vehicle even if the person is not in it, people going to jail because they just refused to give the pole-leez their name, supreme courts says ok to 'random checkpoints',...sigh.....
funny how 'they' site the constitution for this new bill but, have walked all over it at 'their' lesiure...once again 'they' are useing legal double speak to strip powers out of the constitution. legal doule speak was used to turn the united state of America into the UNITED STATE of AMERICA..a corporation...don't take my word for you own research.. American money printed by a private company...unconstitutional... we pay interest on 'money' that is not even there...marginal lending...i wish we the people could have such a wonderfull ability... AMERICA operates under the 'color of law' meaning 'appears to be'....
when you begin to is very disheartening to see how America has become AMERICA Inc. You don't think that your name in all caps on your birth certificate means something legaly???????? You just go ahead and continue taking the blue pill......
the American way of life is ending..the question is: will we fight for it or will it die like what AMERICA has of the ignorant, home of the lame

posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 07:04 PM
United States justice system is based on Common Law, which originates in England. I believe that is why it says English.
At least, that's what I remember from the Criminal Law class I took.
I'm too tired to provide any links. Sorry.

posted on Apr, 3 2004 @ 09:53 PM

Originally posted by DClark
United States justice system is based on Common Law, which originates in England. I believe that is why it says English.
At least, that's what I remember from the Criminal Law class I took.
I'm too tired to provide any links. Sorry.

It's not so much the common law reference that concerns me. It is the the "English constitutional" part that makes me wonder about the bill author's intentions. Not only does it remove the rights of the Supreme and district courts to rule on the constitutionality of actions taken by government officials and offices, if they claim to be acting under the Supreme Law of God, but the judges must interpret the US Constitution according to English law. It may be of little importance, but with the way our freedoms have been being compromised lately, I think the question should at least be raised.

I really can't believe the lack of comment on the bill itself. Is everyone already aware of this? Or does it just not concern anyone, that they are trying to give free reign to the government to act according to their interpretation of God's Law?

posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 02:36 PM
Interesting. The bill's very title is tantamount to an admission from our very own senators and representatives that our Constitution as we know it, is defunct.

That is of little surprise considering that almost every ammendment to the Bill Of Rights has been routinely trampled. It's sort of like a contract that is declared null & void when neither party upholds or enforces it's agreements.

When will it become apparent to the sheeple of this country that the true divide is not between race, religion or class, but between those who govern and those who are governed?

[Edited on 13-4-2004 by Outland]

posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 01:19 AM
Do you think that since they are trying to pass this act that it may sway some of the suprem court justsices views on some caes in fear of this act passing?

new topics

top topics


log in