Redstate

By Skycop150 Posted in The Courts — Comments (2) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Recently, on 12 June 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States, made a major blunder concerning the War on Terror, the Constitution of the U.S. and left this country wide open to repercussion that haven't even been thought up yet!

Posted here is a letter (this was also originally posted on my private blog that I am sending to every member of Congress, (I am going to hurt some trees this week forgive me for that), and the Supreme Court, and various media outlets. I hope that all of you will investigate the issue and take action in some way! You don't have to do what I am doing but speak out about the issue! Here is my letter :( forgive the formatting issues --this was originally a Word doc.)

Also for full disclosure: Since I am now a clergyman (Greek Orthodox Church) I took up using by "baptismal" name after ordination, which is Panagiotis (Greek). Robert is my given & legal name, and since I was writing Congress (as a voter) that was the name I used on my letter. There was no attempt to misrepresent myself. Although I wrote this as a private citizen and not as a representative of the Greek Orthodox Church. Thanks for reading the letter and please don't let this fall through the cracks.

15 June 2008

MEMORANDUM FOR: UNITED STATES SENATE, et. al.
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, et. al.
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JUDICIAL COMMITTEE, et. al.
Washington D.C., U.S.A.

FROM: Mr. Robert E. Hanley Jr.
247 Rutgers Rd.
Piscataway, NJ. 08854
617-633-2120 (cell)

SUBJECT: United States Supreme Court Decision of 12 June 2008: BOUMEDIENE et al. v. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, et al. (553 U. S. ____ (2008))

The Honorable Senator:

The Honorable Representative:

I am writing to you at this time as a private citizen, not as a member of any organization, or affiliate thereof. I am a registered voter of legal age, and a [natural born] resident of the State of New Jersey, and the United States of America. I have served my country honorably in the United States Air Force, and am a disabled veteran. As such, I am imploring the United States Congress, seeking redress, over the issue discussed in this letter.
On 12 June 2008, the United States Supreme Court, (hereafter USSC), ruled on BOUMEDIENE et al. v. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, et al. (hereafter BOUMEDIENE et al. v. BUSH), by a decision of 5-4. I am sure that you are aware of the specifics of the ruling, and I will not repeat, the opinion of the Justices within this letter. I do want you to know however, that I do not agree with the decision of the USSC in this matter, and I am therefore asking the House Judicial committee, as well as, the entire Congress of the United States, to take this matter under serious review; so as to begin impeachment proceedings against the following USSC Justice(s): Kennedy, Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, and Breyer.
*************
PRIMARY COMPLAINT AND REASON FOR REQUEST OF IMPEACHMENT:
The USSC derives its authority from Article III. of the United States Constitution, (hereafter Constitution), and furthermore from, Title 28 of the U.S. Code, (hereafter USC.), Chapter 81§et al. The right of habeas corpus, which was at the heart of, BOUMEDIENE et al. v. BUSH, is covered within the Constitution, under Amendment V, and applicable USC and U.S. State laws. Yet it is to be applied only to United States Citizens. The Constitution does not speak to the right, of enemy combatants captured upon a foreign battlefield, and detained by the United States Military or her personal. In Amendment X to the Constitution, the following is set forth: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” In this case, the people are the citizens of the United States, for which the Constitution is binding, and provides for our form of government. In other words, the matters upon which the Constitution is silent revert back to the U.S. States, and her citizens (i.e. The People).
The Constitution does not allow for the Justices of the USSC, to add to, or take from, the Constitution. This action (amending the Constitution –for adding or repealing parts of, or the whole amendment(s)) may only be accomplished by the people, through their congressional representatives. In this most recent decision of the USSC, they [the USSC Justices named above] have violated the rights of the people, by not only violating Amendment X to the Constitution, but have also, surreptitiously amended the Constitution itself, by granting rights (i.e., in this case, the right of habeas corpus) to detainees covered within the court’s decision , which is the sole purview of the United States Congress, acting on behalf of the people, as their representatives. I repeat, that it is not within, the scope of authority of the Justices of the USSC to grant these rights. Interpretation cannot (ever) equate to amending the Constitution!
Article V. of the Constitution: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
As is clearly spelled out in Article V. the process of amending the Constitution clearly does not lie with the Justices, other than, that, as private citizens, they may invoke their right to vote in a lawful election, either yea or nay, for a proposed amendment(s) to the Constitution. Such processes also exist at the state level, that is, for amending a state constitution. Howbeit, each state will have its own procedures and rules –solely at the state level, yet even these rules must not override the Constitution of the United States. It is completely unconscionable, that the five Justices in question took it upon themselves to usurp the authority, of the very document which grants their authority, and outlines the processes by which the Constitution may or may not be amended.
The entire reason, the Founding Fathers of our nation, made the process of amending the Constitution so intricate, is to provide protection, to and for, the very fabric which our binds and governs our nation, that being the Constitution itself. If public officials, who did not agree with a particular policy, were able to ply this wicked tradecraft, of judicial activism, then the Constitution would not have been worth the time and effort the founders put into its creation. The process (of amendments) was never meant to lie within the realm of one body of government, or with one or more agencies, the process was solely intended to remain within the realm, and discretion of the people of the United States, by, and through, their representatives, which is the Congress of the United States.
Where (and when) the USSC comes into play, is to decide, if said amendments, to the Constitution (or where applicable federal and/or state laws) are within the scope and intent of the original document itself. How in this case did the USSC do that? The fact is that they did not do that at all. They saw something with which they did not agree, and they changed the Constitution to suit their needs. Where was the input from the people of the United States? Where was the legislative process in granting the right, of habeas corpus, to enemy combatants/detainees? There was no process, and as my representatives in Congress, that should give you all a moment of pause! It is, completely and totally, the right of the Justices, to disagree with the War on Terror, or the policies of how detainees are being treated, but it is not their right, to change the Constitution, so as to, bring policy in to line with their beliefs; and in effect create law(s), that otherwise did not exist, as a creation through, and of, a legislative process. The Justices whom were in dissent, in this case, clearly spoke to this issue in the dissenting opinion(s) . The Justices in the majority in this particular case have acted in such a manner, as that, defined by judicial misconduct, in its most repulsive form.
Therefore, in light of the above facts, they [USSC Justices Kennedy, Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, and Breyer] are not worthy of the office to which they were appointed, and as such, should be brought before the full Congress of the United States of America, to answer for their misconduct and face impeachment proceedings, so that they may be removed from their respective offices.
*************
In conclusion, please know that this matter is not going to simply go away. The actions and repercussions of this case, are going to have long term effects (most of which are not yet felt), for the United States. I am urging you as my representatives to act accordingly and arrest this action now! This is not a polite request, it is a demand, from one who votes in elections, and seeks redress for the egregious action, which this court has committed not simply against me, but the entire country. I personally, will do everything that I possibly can, to ensure that Congress takes the appropriate action against the USSC, for this decision and their actions, and the repercussions which will follow.
This is not a matter about which side of the isle you may or may not be on. Rather it is solely about an abhorrent abuse of power by people in a position of Supreme authority (pun intended). I urge you to put aside your politics and act accordingly and honorably, as you promised upon taking your oath of office. Said oath, was to the people of this great nation, not to anyone else. Since I want you to know that I am committed in this effort, I am sending copies of this letter to every member of the House and Senate, the USSC, and members of the press. I am doing this in the hopes that one voice will be heard and so that I can be guaranteed the protections I am personally afforded under the United States Constitution!
I am the POC for this memorandum and may be contacted at the above address/phone number, and via email @: skycop150@yahoo.com

Respectfully,

Mr. Robert E. Hanley Jr.

Cc: UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE John G. Roberts, Jr.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ASSOCIATE JUSTICE(S) et. al.
Fox News inc. Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham
Rush Limbaugh
Human Events
Redstate
The Drudge Report
NBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, CNN news outlets