One justice of the United States Supreme Court said in this connection, and I quote, "to put the
matter plainly, there is nothing in all the history of this Court’s decisions which supports this Constitutional
rule. The Court’s draconian pronouncement which makes unconstitutional the legislatures of most of the
fifty states finds no support in the words of the constitution in any prior decision of this court or
in the 175-year political history of our Federal union . . . These decisions mark a long step backward
into the unhappy era where a majority of the members of this court were thought by many to have convinced
themselves and each other that the demands of the constitution were to be measured not by what it says
buy by their own notions of wise political theory."
Two other Justices of the Court said, "such a massive repudiation of the experience of our whole
past in asserting destructively novel Judicial power demands analysis of the role of this Court and our
Constitutional scheme . . . It may well impair the Court’s position as the ultimate organ of the Supreme
Law of the Land . . ."
The only reason it is the Supreme Law of the Land today is because we have a President who cares so little
for freedom that he would send the armed forces into the states to enforce the dictatorial decree.
Our colonist forefather had something to say about that too.
The Declaration of Independence cited as an act of tyranny the fact that, ". . . Kept among us in
times of peace standing armies without the consent of the legislature."
Today, 188 years later, we have actually witnessed the invasion of the State of Arkansas, Mississippi,
and Alabama by the armed forces of the United States and maintained in the state against the will of the
people and without consent of state legislatures.
It is a form of tyranny worse than that of King George III who had sent mercenaries against the colonies
because today the Federal Judicial tyrants have sanctioned the use of brother against brother and father
against son by federalizing the National Guard.
In 1776 the colonists also complained that the monarch ". . . Has incited domestic insurrections
among us . . ."
Today, we have absolute proof that the Federal Department of Justice has planned, supervised, financed
and protected acts of insurrection in the southern states, resulting in vandalism, property damage, personal
injury, and staggering expense to the states.
In 1776 it was charged that the monarchy had asserted power to ". . . Dissolve representative houses
and to punish . . . For opposing with manly firmness his invasions of the rights of the people. . . ."
Today, the Federal judiciary asserts the power not only to dissolve state legislatures but to create them
and to dissolve all state laws and state judicial decrees, and to punish a state governor by trial without
jury ". . . For opposing with manly firmness his invasions of the rights of the people. . . ."
The colonists also listed as acts of tyranny:
". . . The erection of a multitude of new offices and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our
people and to eat out their substance . . . ;"
". . . Suspending our own legislatures and declaring themselves invested with the power to legislate
for us in all cases whatsoever;"
". . . Abolishing the free system of the English laws . . . ;"
—it had "abdicated government here;"
—refusing to assent to the laws enacted by the people
". . . Laws considered most wholesome and necessary for the public good;"
—and ". . . For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury . . . ; For taking away
our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally form of our government; for
suspending our own legislatures and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all
cases whatsoever."
The United States Supreme Court is guilty of each and every one of these acts of tyranny.
Therefore, I echo the sentiments of our forefathers who declared: "a prince, whose character is thus
marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."
Ladies and gentlemen, I have listed only a few of the many acts of tyranny which have been committed or
specifically sanctioned by the United States Supreme Court.
I feel it important that you should know and understand what it is that these people are trying to do.
The written opinions of the court are filled with double talk, semantics, jargon, and meaningless phrases.
The words they use are not important. The ideas that they represent are the things which count.
It is perfectly obvious from the left-wing liberal press and from the left-wing law journals that what
the court is saying behind all the jargon is that they don’t like our form of government.
They think they can establish a better one. In order to do so it is necessary that they overthrow our
existing form, destroy the democratic institutions created by the people, change the outlook, religion,
and philosophy, and bring the whole area of human thought, aspiration, action and organization, under
the absolute control of the court. Their decisions reveal this to be the goal of the liberal element on
the court which is in a majority at present.
It has reached the point where one may no longer look to judicial decisions to determine what the court
may do. However, it is possible to predict with accuracy the nature of the opinions to be rendered. One
may find the answer in the Communist Manifesto.
The Communists are dedicated to the overthrow of our form of government. They are dedicated to the destruction
of the concept of private property. They are dedicated to the object of destroying religion as the basis
of moral and ethical values.
The Communists are determined that all natural resources shall be controlled by the central government,
that all productive capacity of the nation shall be under the control of the central government, that
the political sovereignty of the people shall be destroyed as an incident to control of local schools.
It is their objective to capture the minds of our youth in order to indoctrinate them in what to think
and not how to think.
I do not call the members of the United States Supreme Court Communists. But I do say, and I submit for
your judgment the fact that every single decision of the court in the past ten years which related in
any way to each of these objectives has been decided against freedom and in favor of tyranny.
A politician must stand on his record. Let the Court stand on its record.
The record reveals, for the past number of years, that the chief, if not the only beneficiaries of the
present Court’s rulings, have been duly and lawfully convicted criminals, Communists, atheists, and clients
of vociferous left-wing minority groups. |
