Where in hell did they go to law school? – Liberty?
14 Likes
University of Oregon, both of ‘em. Your guess is as good as mine why they’d take this tack—best card they have to play, maybe, clients’ wishes, perverse desire to be sanctioned, I’m no expert so I don’t know.
10 Likes
LOL!!! It’s like they WANT to go to jail for a long long time.
Now you’ll know how those cows felt when you stuck them in pens, Captain Shit-for-brains.
Welcome to the new and improved Bundy Ranch:
17 Likes
Christ on a Ritz. These guys could have just googled it:
There are three methods by which the United States obtains exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction over federal lands in a state: (1) a state statute consenting to the purchase of land by the United States for the purposes enumerated in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 7, of the Constitution of the United States; (2) a state cession statute; and (3) a reservation of federal jurisdiction upon the admission of a state into the Union. See Collins v. Yosemite Park Co., 304 U.S. 518 (1938). Since February 1, 1940, the United States acquires no jurisdiction over federal lands in a state until the head or other authorized officer of the department or agency which has custody of the lands formally accepts the jurisdiction offered by state law. See 40 U.S.C. § 255; Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 (1943). Prior to February 1, 1940, acceptance of jurisdiction had been presumed in the absence of evidence of a contrary intent on the part of the acquiring agency or Congress. See Silas Mason Co., Inc. v. Tax Commission, 302 U.S. 186 (1937).
Justice Manual | 1630. Protection Of Government Property -- Real Property -- 18 U.S.C. 7 | United States Department of Justice
Although this is complex, it is long-settled law. Without Scalia on the Supreme Court, it is likely to remain so.
11 Likes
Trump–Bundy
We’re Making Murica Great Again!!!
5 Likes
They are Yippies with more conservative haircuts and worse morals. The intent is pretty clearly to make the trial into as much of a circus as they can so that they can get all their supporters to believe they’ve been railroaded. I wonder what federal facility will be taken over in an attempt to prove that the constitution requires only men to be elected president.
6 Likes
Remarkable. They get everything about the meaning and purpose of the Constitution exactly wrong. The Constitution was created to form a more powerful federal government, not less. States are not “sovereigns” in any meaningful way, because they are subordinate to the federal government and federal law. Did they edit out the supremacy clause?
All of these arguments are PRATTs.
7 Likes
The big mistake they’re making here is deigning to put up a defense. The federal government is not a legitimate entity, and it’s courts have no jurisdiction under God. God gave this land to the Bundys, to be governed by the Sheriffs, and to be enjoyed by all other true patriots who are willing to take up arms and defend their rights. But as soon as you enter a plea, or a defense, or recognize them in any way, you have accepted their tyrannical rule. How’s that?
11 Likes
I hope those Bundy dilrods and their fellow defendants enjoy their time in the federal pen. A defense this stupid and obviously wrong is not even likely to be cognizable by the court.
3 Likes
Well here’s hoping that this prosecution finally puts rest to the entire notion that the Federal Government doesn’t have jurisdiction over Federal land. The Bundys will make their stand in a court of law, their motion will be denied, and they will be tried by a jury of their peers. The law was settled by the Supreme Court long ago, and no court worth their salt will even give this argument a moment’s notice. And the Bundys WILL be imprisoned for a very, very long time.
5 Likes
I wonder if the loan he got from Small Business Administration is ‘constitutional’, nowhere in the constitution says the federal government should be helping startups.
Anyway I wonder how the business is doing now that he has been away for 4 months? Or has his wife already ran away with the manager taking along all the money?
7 Likes
“or what” would be a Bag of Dicks.
6 Likes
At this point, I can only quote that great philosopher and political theorist Ralph Kramden, who once said “Homina homina homina . . .”. Now seriously, how can you argue with THAT?
5 Likes
Zeta Reticuli. Gotta keep your alien overlords straight.
4 Likes
That sort of language wasn’t in the McGuffey reader, the bible, or the book of mormon; therefore, it has no legal standing. And besides, Ammon and his brothers and friends can’t read beyond 3rd grade anyway and proud of it!
3 Likes
Well, at Malheur it was dildos …
2 Likes
Actually, that’s not true at all. Dual sovereignty is an important part of our system of constitutional government. If there is a conflict between state law and federal law, the federal law will take precedence under the Supremacy Clause, but there are many areas in which the federal government has no constitutional authority to legislate. Such areas remain the province of state law (Amendment X).
It was originally conceived that the State and the federal governments were delegated almost entirely separate functions. It was anticipated by the Founders that issues of “concurrent jurisdiction” would be relatively infrequent. The dynamics of this dual system of domestic government have been delineated through various court cases and termed “dual sovereignty.” Basically, they are as follows:
The provisions of various federal laws may not be applied in such a manner so as to:
- Coerce or force any State into an agreement to implement a federal program or law;
- Devise any State program or provisions thereof in compliance with a federal law or subject to the approval of a federal agency; or
- Command State law enforcement, or other State officers to enforce a federal law or federal agency directives.
Any of these prohibitions on federal action would constitute an unlawful usurpation of the independent “territorial sovereignty,” jurisdiction and authority of the States. Essentially, the State and federal governments are “foreign” to eachother. Each receives its authority from a seperate delegation by the sovereign “body politic.” There is no hierarchy of institutions.
http://famguardian.org/publications/propertyrights/dulsover.html
3 Likes
Yup, dildos, but also bags of dicks. Turns out they’re gummy candies. For just $15 you can send of bag of them anonymously to…whoever. And someone did.
7 Likes
Beware the fringed flag!
7 Likes
My money is on ADX Florence, with all the other terrorists
3 Likes