ATTORNEYS LAW STUDENTS PUBLIC
TOP POSTS ALL POSTS SUBMIT POST
Share | Print | Report Post Second Amendment Chatboard

Re: Denied Illinois FOID card
Posted by Guns on 1/15/08

    The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated
    that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal
    Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is
    in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to
    the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity
    from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in
    original]. By law, a judge is a state officer. The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private
    individual (in his person). VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE In Illinois, 705 ILCS 205/4 states "Every
    person admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law shall, before his name is entered
    upon the roll to be kept as hereinafter provided, take and subscribe an oath, substantially in the
    following form: 'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be), that I will support the
    constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Illinois, and that I will
    faithfully discharge the duties of the office of attorney and counselor at law to the best of my
    ability.'" In Illinois, a judge must take a second oath of office. Under 705 ILCS 35/2 states, in
    part, that "The several judges of the circuit courts of this State, before entering upon the duties
    of their office, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation, which shall be filed
    in the office of the Secretary of State: 'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that
    I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of
    Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of judge of ______ court, according to
    the best of my ability.'" Further, if the judge had enlisted in the U.S. military, then he has
    taken a third oath. Under Title 10 U.S.C. Section 502 the judge had subscribed to a lifetime oath,
    in pertinent part, as follows: "I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support
    and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I
    will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; ...". The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "No
    state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without
    violating his undertaking to support it.". Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). Any
    judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that
    Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. The judge is engaged
    in acts of treason. Having taken at least two, if not three, oaths of office to support the
    Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, any judge who has
    acted in violation of the Constitution is engaged in an act or acts of treason (see below). If a
    judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S.
    200 (1888), he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason.
    TREASON Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged
    in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406
    (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821) What is the penalty for
    treason? Any judge or attorney who does not report the above judges for treason as required by law
    may themselves be guilty of misprison of treason, 18 U.S.C. Section 2382.


    On 1/14/08, -- wrote:
    > On 1/14/08, Guns wrote:
    >> In the State of Illinois, a judge must take a second oath of office. Under 705 ILCS 35/2
    >> states, in part, that "The several judges of the circuit courts of this State, before entering
    >> upon the duties of their office, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation,
    >> which shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State:
    >>
    >> 'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the constitution of
    >> the United States, and the constitution of the State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully
    >> discharge the duties of judge of ______ court, according to the best of my ability.'"
    >>
    >> So your stament is incorrect concerning federal constitution, because the judge raised his
    > hand
    >> and swore he would protect the Federal constitution.
    >
    >
    > As US courts currently interpret the 2nd amendment it is not applicable to the various states.
    > States may make any laws regarding the control of firearms as they see fit to. This has always
    > been the case.
    >
    > However a case before the Supreme Court this term challenges the long held view of the 2nd
    > Amendment as a state right rather than a personal right.
    >
    > When our country was formed the big concern was that the federal government not have absolute
    > power over state governments in all matters. The concept of dual sovereignty was developed.
    > Certain matters the federal government has absolute authority over and certain maters are
    > reserved for state control. The US Constitution always applies to the federal government and
    > usually applies to state governments with some exceptions. The 7th amendment is one example of
    > where the Constitution does not apply to states. The 7th Amendment applies to US Federal Courts
    > but not state courts. In State court the 7h Amendment does not compel a trial by jury in a
    > civil case. The following is the 7th Amendment:
    >
    > "In Suits at common law, where the value
    > in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars,
    > the right of trial by jury shall be preserved,
    > and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise
    > re-examined in any Court of the United States,
    > than according to the rules of the common law."
    >
    > Now a person might think that all courts in the US must give a person a trial by jury in a civil
    > matter. Not so! This part of the Constitution only applies to the federal government not state
    > governments.
    >
    > Likewise the 2nd Amendment only applies to the federal government not state governments. Dual
    > sovereignty is extremely difficult to understand so don't feel alone in your misunderstanding.
    > Until the Supreme Court rules otherwise, the 2nd Amendment does not restrict states from making
    > their own gun control laws.

     
     

 
Google
 
Web Counsel.Net
  Site Map: Home Search Legal Jobs Classifieds Law Students Contacts Practice Areas Advertise
  © 1996 - 2008. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.