Supreme Court hears abortion case

Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, of New Hampshire, defended a law which states that a minor must inform her parent or guardian 48 hours before having an abortion.

The 2003 law which the Attorney General of New Hampshire defended provides a "mechanism" to allow a judge to decide if an "emergency" abortion should be carried out.
Justice Stephen Breyer asked: "If there's an emergency and the doctor thinks an immediate abortion is needed. He calls the judge at 2 a.m. and there's no answer. It's an absolute mess. What's supposed to happen?"

The Federalist Solution: The Supreme Court sends it back to the State Court because the U.S. Constitution doesn't mention "privacy," "viability," or other terms of this nature. Abortion law should be left up to State Legislatures, or the people of the State via proposition. Since the Supreme Court decided to take the case, they now have a binding obligation to the 10th Amendment. In other words, the New Hampshire law is Constitutional.

Source #1

Source #2

Thanksgiving...

"The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind" (Thomas Paine, 1776).

"It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors" (George Washington, 1789 - Thanksgiving Proclamation).

Rights...

As many of you know, San Francisco voters recently rejected military recruitment in public schools via a referendum. Those in favor of the decision argued on national television that San Francisco voters exercised their First Amendment rights, which they argued, was democracy in action.

First Amendment rights? Who gave us these rights, and who protects them? Would we have succeeded from Britain if not for our military? Is not it, as well, the right of our military recruiters to be protected under the First Amendment? Is not our military, a volunteer force? Students in public schools are forced to learn many contradictions that they later dismiss, but they are not forced into the military. The restrictions on military recruiters are ridiculously absurd, and San Francisco has set a new precedent. Democracy was not intended to be used to punish those who protect it.

"The circumstances that endanger the safety of nations are infinite, and for this reason no constitutional shackles can wisely be imposed on the power to which the care of it is committed." - Alexander Hamilton, 1787 - (Federalist No. 23)

Source #1

Romney

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is under siege by ignorant pond scum. The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that homosexual marriage is legal. Governor Romney who recently visited Washington's Federalist Society remarked that the Supreme Court's decision was to appease the "community at large," instead of fulfilling their constitutional obligations.

Romney said, "I think the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court erred by reading into our constitution something that was clearly not there. They found a right that John Adams would be very surprised to suggest that it was found within our constitution.”
Romney’s right, if something is not found in a state constitution then it is simply not there. Any state judiciary has no right to rule based upon popular opinion. Popular opinion, good or bad, has no place in a court of law. I hate the fact that it has become embedded in peoples minds that a court can create law.

Governor Romney was elected in the very liberal state of Massachusetts simply because they were tired of being taxed and wanted accountability. I guess they didn’t want accountability in government, because they’re rejecting judicial accountability. Mitt Romney is very high on my list of favorite individuals. He is a true Federalist.

Please Resign, Mr. Reid

Senate Minority Leader, Harry Reid came out swinging. Reid said Vice President Cheney had been involved in the "manipulation of intelligence to sell the war in Iraq" as well as "leaking classified information to discredit White House critics." Reid also asked the President not to Pardon "Mr. Libby."

Harry Reid needs to resign. There is absolutely no proof that the Vice President manipulated intelligence to "sell" the war in Iraq, or disclosed classified information about a CIA agent. This is nothing less than slander. If the Minority Leader has any proof, let him speak up or shut up. I would also suggest that he not advise the President of the United States who he should or should not pardon. Did Mr. Reid throw a fit when Former President Clinton pardoned Marc Rich? I don't think so. So why is he throwing a 'pre-emptive fit' at the notion of pardoning "Scooter Libby?"

Source #1

Judicial Example

Marion County Circuit Judge Joseph Guimond upheld an Oregon Amendment reading, "It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage."

This is a judge the founders would be proud of. It has nothing to do with banning homosexual marriage, and everything to do with upholding State Constitutions, and therefore States' Rights. This is a federalist principle.

"The State governments possess inherent advantages, which will ever give them an influence and ascendancy over the National Government, and will for ever preclude the possibility of federal encroachments. That their liberties, indeed, can be subverted by the federal head, is repugnant to every rule of political calculation." - Alexander Hamilton, 1788.

Source #1