cryptogon.com news – analysis – conspiracies

June 20th, 2011

Hmm. I didn’t think that such an apparently desirable decision would come about this late in the game. Am I missing something? This seems too good to be true.

Via: Jurist:

The US Supreme Court Thursday ruled in Bond v. United States that a private individual can challenge whether a federal criminal law passed to implement an international treaty is valid under the Tenth Amendment.

…Bond has standing to challenge whether the federal law interferes with the powers left only to the states. The court said:

to argue that the National Government has interfered with state sovereignty in violation of the Tenth Amendment is to assert the legal rights and interests of States and States alone. That, however, is not so. … Bond seeks to vindicate her own constitutional interests. The individual, in a proper case, can assert injury from governmental action taken in excess of the authority that federalism defines. Her rights in this regard do not belong to a State.

…

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg concurred, joined by Stephen Breyer, arguing that Bond had standing because “Bond, like any other defendant, has a personal right not to be convicted under a constitutionally invalid law.”

Resistance | Posted in Dictatorship Top Of Page