MSLP Articles

A President’s War Speech vs A President’s War

– May 2, 2012Posted in: MSLP Articles

Since the Afghanistan War started in 2001, over 1,800 military men and women have been killed and over 15,000 have been injured, (not including the countless brain injuries that go undiagnosed or unreported).

In an obvious campaign speech in Afghanistan yesterday, Obama said:

“And one year ago, from a base here in Afghanistan, our troops launched the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. The goal that I set – to defeat al Qaeda, and deny it a chance to rebuild – is within reach.”

The truth is that since bin Laden was killed a year ago 367 US men and women have been killed and nearly 4,500 have been injured in Afghanistan (again, not counting the countless injuries that go undiagnosed or unreported).

In his speech, Obama went on to say:

“We have a clear path to fulfill our mission in Afghanistan, while delivering justice to al Qaeda.”

“Our goal is to destroy al Qaeda, and we are on a path to do exactly that.”

“Others will ask why we don’t leave immediately. That answer is also clear: we must give Afghanistan the opportunity to stabilize. Otherwise, our gains could be lost, and al Qaeda could establish itself once more.”

Destroy al Qaeda, Mr President…? Gains in Afghanistan, Mr President…? Our mission in Afghanistan, Mr President…? Let’s review the previous comments of Obama’s war team.

In October 2009, Obama’s National Security Adviser, General Jim Jones, said:

“Obviously, the good news and what Americans should feel at least good about in Afghanistan is that the al Qaeda presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country. No bases. No ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.”

The truth is that since General Jones’ statement in 2009 over 1,100 US men and women have died in the War in Afghanistan and nearly 12,000 have been injured (not counting the countless brain injuries that go undiagnosed or unreported).

In July 2010 CIA Director Leon Panetta said the number of al Qaeda in Afghanistan is relatively small:

“At most, we’re looking at 50 to 100, maybe less.”

The truth is that since Panetta’s statement in 2010 nearly 800 US men and women have died in Afghanistan and over 8,000 have been injured.

In short, for every 1 al Qaeda member we were told there was supposedly left  in Afghanistan in 2009, we’ve lost 11 US men and women. Not only have we lost American lives overseas, but there are domestic casualties to this war as well.

According to the CBO’s estimate, we’ve spent half a trillion dollars on the War in Afghanistan. The federal government’s authority to spy on US citizens without a warrant has been renewed. The federal government has codified the power of the to detain US citizens in a military prison indefinitely on terrorist suspicions without evidence, charges, or a trial. The US Attorney General has affirmed the President’s authority to assassinate US citizens suspected of terrorism, again, without presenting any evidence, without charges, and without a trial. Honest men, women, and children are getting pat-down and having their privacy violated by security guards before boarding a plane. Unmanned drones are taking to the skies across the country to spy on Americans. And that’s only a portion of the freedoms we’ve lost in this 11 year war on terror.

But all of this will come to an end soon, right? The war will be won, US troops can come home, and we’ll be given back all of the constitutional rights that have been taken from us, right? In his speech yesterday, Obama also stated:

“But over the last three years, the tide has turned. We broke the Taliban’s momentum. We’ve built strong Afghan Security Forces.”

And within 90 minutes of Obama leaving Afghanistan, the Taliban launched an attack on a compound housing international contractors, diplomats, and aid workers – killing 7 and wounding 17. This begins there annual spring offensive against foreign occupation.

I would hope that Americans would look past a political speech and look to the realities of the war on terror. Unfortunately history proves otherwise. Yesterday was also the 9 year anniversary of President Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech in which he assured Americans:

“In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our Allies have prevailed.”

Since Bush declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq 9 years ago, over 4,300 US military men and women have died in the Iraq War that followed and nearly 32,000 have been injured – again, not counting the countless injuries that go undiagnosed or unreported.

Let’s get US presence out of other nations. Let’s bring the troops home.

I think that people want peace so much that one of these days government had better get out of their way and let them have it. – Dwight D. Eisenhower

Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it. – General Douglas MacArthur

The loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or imagined, from abroad. – James Madison

The most successful war seldom pays for its losses. – Thomas Jefferson

Mississippi’s Personhood Amendment Is Another Scam

– July 20, 2011Posted in: MSLP Articles

Regardless of where you stand on the abortion issue itself, every person ought to be disgusted by the political games that Mississippi’s Republican (and Democrat) “leaders” continue to play with Mississippians around hot-button issues (eminent domain, public schooling, and redistricting for example).

UPDATE MARCH 7, 2012: After Republicans campaigned on the back of the personhood amendment that failed last November, two personhood bills were introduced in Jackson this session – one in the MS House (HC 61), and one in the MS Senate (SC 555).

As mentioned below, these bills were the only Constitutionally legitimate way to alter the MS Bill of Rights. But, contrary to what Republicans campaigned on, both HC 61 and SB 555 died quietly in their Republican controlled committees. No surprise there. The moral of the article below is that Republicans, and Democrats, have a long history of saying one thing on the campaign trail, then doing something else once they’re elected.

Initiative 26 is a ballot initiative to amend the Mississippi Constitution to define a “person” to include every human being beginning at the moment of conception. It would effectively criminalize the intentional abortion of a fetus in the state. From the recent Personhood Petition (PDF) that was circulated and signed by over130,000 pro-life Mississippians:

“SECTION 1. Article III of the constitution of the state of Mississippi is hearby amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION TO READ:

Section 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, “The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.”

Again, this article isn’t about the issue of abortion itself, and it isn’t about the use of mob-rule ballot initiatives either. It’s to point out the Republican scam that’s obvious to anyone who’s read the Mississippi Constitution or anyone who’s worked on a ballot initiative and read the Secretary of State’s Citizen’s Guide to Constitutional Initiatives (PDF).

From the Mississippi Constitution, Section 273:

(1) Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed by the Legislature or by initiative of the people.
(5) The initiative process shall not be used:
(a) For the proposal, modification or repeal of any portion of the Bill of Rights of this Constitution; (again, Article 3 is the Bill of Rights)

From page 5 of the Secretary of State’s Citizen’s Guide to Constitutional Initiatives:

The initiative process cannot be used for any of the following:
1. To modify the Bill of Rights.

So on one hand, you have the Mississippi Constitution strictly forbidding ballot initiatives that would change the Bill of Rights. On the other hand, the Personhood Amendment states it’s intention is to amend the Bill of Rights by proposing a new section, Section 33. It’s as if the initiative was designed to fail.

However, Constitutional amendments via the state legislature can modify or propose an addition to the Bill of Rights:

(1) Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed by the Legislature or by initiative of the people.

(2) Whenever two-thirds (2/3) of each house of the Legislature, which two-thirds (2/3) shall consist of not less than a majority of the members elected to each house, shall deem any change, alteration or amendment necessary to this Constitution, such proposed amendment, change or alteration shall be read and passed by two-thirds (2/3) vote of each house, as herein provided; public notice shall then be given by the Secretary of State at least thirty (30) days preceding an election, at which the qualified electors shall vote directly for or against such change, alteration or amendment

I find it really hard to believe that all of the Republican “leaders” who represent various districts throughout Mississippi haven’t read the Constitution they take an oath to defend (actually, I can believe it). So why are so many so-called conservative leaders going along with the scam? Why aren’t any of the so-called conservative “leaders” speaking out about the unquestionably constitutional method of doing what they actually tell their conservative supporters they intend to do?

Who really knows for sure? Politicians tend to have all sorts of crooked motives to do some of the things they do. My guess is that it’s for a couple reasons: 1) Republicans don’t want to ruffle each others feathers – especially Phil Bryant’s; and 2) to gin up fights among voters because it’s the big fights over hot-button conservative issues that drive conservatives in droves to the polls to vote for Republicans. After all, what in the world would politicians do if we didn’t bicker with one another? How would manipulators and do-gooders ever get elected under the banner of limited government? How would politicians ever justify stealing from one person and giving it to another if we didn’t raise a ruckus?

The fact is that if so-called conservative “leaders” wanted a Constitutional amendment that bans abortion in Mississippi, they could have it. Even Democrat Billy McCoy says he supports the Personhood amendment. See, every year a legislator or two will introduce an anti-abortion bill that would amend the MS Constitution and do exactly what Initiative 26 is trying to do. Again, the Mississippi Constitution says the legislative process is the only legal way to change the Bill of Rights.

The biggest obstacle to the several anti-abortion constitutional amendments in Mississippi has been Lt Governor Phil Bryant, who’s pro-life position has been questioned in the past, who made a noble speech on the steps of the Secretary of State’s office (at 5min 30sec) when the signatures were delivered, and who apparently makes deals with the Lord when he prays for higher public office:

When I decided to seek office, I had a simple prayer. Lord, I want to do something very special. … I’d like to end abortion in Mississippi. That’s what I want to do! … And I said, Lord if you’ll send me there, if you’ll let me reach that office, then I’m gonna do all that I can to stop this horrible sin that has blighted America. One day I hope generations will look back and say, “how could we have done such a thing? Where were the people, where were the churches, where were the Christians, where were the leaders that allowed us to destroy the next generation?” .. Now I will assure you, I believe it in my heart the Lord has led us here for this purpose. When this is on the ballot in Nov 2011, you’re gonna see an overwhelming vote. Now they say, ‘oh you guys just wanna get it out because it’s gonna help you and your campaign!’ That’s the silliest thing I’ve ever heard of!”

But The Truth Is

Every time an anti-abortion Constitutional amendment is introduced in the legislature it dies in the Senate Constitution committee because the Chairman single-handedly kills it. Who is the Chairman of the Senate Constitution committee? Bennie Turner, a  socialist Democrat. How did Bennie Turner, a socialist Democrat, become Chairman of such an important committee? Senate Chairs are appointed by the Lt Governor. So it’s limited-government conservative Republican, Phil Bryant, that appointed a socialist Democrat to be the person who single-handedly controls which Constitutional amendments are allowed to come out of the committee and which ones never see the light of day… just like limited-government conservative Republican, Amy Tuck, appointed socialist Democrat Hob Bryan when she was Lt Governor.

Republicans Had The Opportunity To End Abortion

Republicans have had the opportunity to end abortion in Mississippi. One opportunity was in 2011 when Republican Senator, Lee Yancey, introduced SB2743.

SB2743 Summary: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 41-41-33, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO DECLARE LEGISLATIVE INTENT RELATIVE TO THE TERMINATION OF THE LIFE OF AN UNBORN CHILD AND THE PROTECTION OF THE HEALTH AND RIGHTS OF WOMEN; TO PROHIBIT ABORTIONS IN THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI EXCEPT IN CERTAIN CASES; TO AMEND SECTION 41-41-39, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO PRESCRIBE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS ACT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

This bill never came out of the Senate Judiciary A committee. Did the Democrats kill this bill? No. Again, Senate committees are created by the Lt Governor – Republican Phil Bryant. In fact, Republicans held a 10-4 majority in the Judiciary A committee with Republican Joey Fillingane as Chairman. So why did SB2743 never get a full vote by the entire Republican-controlled Senate? That’s a good question pro-lifers should be asking as they head to the polls in droves to elect these same people to office in November. After all, this is the bill pro-lifers have been asking for to end the practice of abortion in Mississippi.

Two other major examples of constitutional amendments that have died in the Senate Constitution committee are the eminent domain reform amendment and the amendment that would have nullified the individual mandate in Obamacare. This sort of hidden roadblock that politicians create throughout the legislative process is another reason why big government legislators get away with sounding like limited government legislators. They can sponsor and vote for all sorts of bills that would limit or reduce the size and scope of government without any risk of it actually passing and actually limiting their role in your life. They rely on their constituents not knowing the details of the “law-making” process.

So, when these so-called conservative leaders tell you, “we’ve tried to pass these things, but the Democrats killed it. But I support your ballot initiatives! We (ya’ll) gotta fight it to win it and God Bless the great people of Mississippi!”, what they’re really saying is, “All of the conservatives come out and vote in November to support these initiatives and vote for me, the conservative guy, while you’re at it. Even tho I’ll appoint another socialist Democrat to block certain issues that need to be saved to generate support for Republicans in future elections, and even though the initiatives could be found unconstitutional, but I know you haven’t read the Mississippi Constitution because all you do is take direction from us leaders without thinking. And I know you’ll vote for me for no other reason except  you wanna beat my Democrat opponent. So I’m just gonna act like I’m working for you, but I’m really just working for me and my special interest buddies. I’m just gonna act like I’m beating back the size and scope of government, but I’m really expanding the government, spending more of your money, and sinking you and future generations further into debt.”

Yep, it’s all a charade to make it look like they’re doing what they say they’re doing. It’s a game of duck-duck-goose and all folks do is run around in circles when one of these so-called conservative Republicans tag them on the head. And Democrats are in on these games too because they know that Democrats and Republicans will ultimately give each other what they want in the “spirit of bi-partisanship”. All one side has to do is ask for more initially, then “compromise” to satisfy their constituents while leaving enough on the table to keep everyone fighting the next time around, and on and on it goes.

I know a lot of good people spent a lot of time (and even their own money) to gather signatures for the Personhood petition while the scammers rallied them on. And again, no matter where you stand on the abortion issue and the use of mob-rule ballot initiatives, you ought to be disgusted by the ongoing scams by Republican and Democrat “leaders”.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Video Shows How Employers Are To Use E-Verify To Hire Employees

– July 13, 2011Posted in: MSLP Articles

Remember the good ol’ days when businesses could conduct their business the best way they saw fit. Remember back when job openings were the property of the job creators? Yeah, those were the good ol’ days when private property rights were a little more respected by the government and the neighborhood busy-bodies. That was back when employment wasn’t used as a tool to control people under the threat of force and employment contracts were between two voluntary participants.

So-called limited government Republicans and their nanny-state cohorts have ensured that those days are long gone in America and in Mississippi. Now job creators and job seekers have to use e-verify (PDF), a federal database containing the information of people who are eligible to work in the US. Although, I’m not exactly sure how forcing job seekers and job creators to submit and verify their personal and employment record into a federal database falls under the guise of limited government conservatism.

But really, …really, it’s not all that different from the good ol’ days, I suppose, and the Federal database will most likely have all the information on you anyway.

All an employer will have to do is verify the photo of the employee, enter the form I-9 (PDF) data into the e-verify database correctly so that it matches up with the Social Security and/or the Homeland Security databases, and watch out for the tentative non-confirmations (TNC). Employers will learn about TNC’s in the USCIS e-verify seminar they’ll attend so they can determine who is and isn’t “authorized” to work in the US.

Shoot-heck, TNC’s can happen for all kind’s of reasons employers will learn about. The employment seekers could be using a name that doesn’t match up with the Social Security and/or Homeland Security databases, or the government could have made an error somewhere on your record, or the employment seeker might just have a weird name. But if any of this happens, the government wants employers to know that potential employees have rights, under the threat of fines and penalties against the employer of course.

A Simple Tentative Non-Confirmation Scenario:

“Will I be fired?” Not yet employment seeker. Let’s go over the government’s TNC notice they sent us for you. Then you can either contest the TNC or not. If you choose not to contest it then yes, you’ll have to take a hike so I can move on to the next employment seeker. If you choose to contest it, then I’ll print you out a referral letter for you to do something or’nother within 8 days of receiving your TNC notice. Then it depends on whether it was an SSA or a DHS TNC. You’ll have to contact whichever one issued the TNC notice – probably so you can give them all the information they need to update your “information”. If it’s a SSA TNC notice, you’ll have to go to the SSA field office. If it’s a DHS TNC notice, you’ll have to call the toll free phone number.

And I’ll keep checking for any updates on your TNC status in the e-verify database until this issue is resolved cause I can’t legally hire you, fire you, train you, put you on administrative leave, or anything else until the database says so. E-verify will let me know if you’re authorized to work for me or not. Oh don’t worry, I only run a business here so I can wait on filling this job opening and training a new employee until the database either authorizes you or denies you. And really, I have plenty of free time to help you with all of this limited government Republican do-gooder job creation and illegal immigration policing stuff. Hang on while I put my customers on hold while we sort this out… mmmKay job seeker? And whatever happens, just remember that the way I use E-verify opens me up for a lawsuit, by you.

All sarcasm aside, job creators own the job openings they create just as they own the equipment their business relies on. Asking the State and Federal governments to regulate the voluntary relationships of private businesses and private job seekers is a perversion of private property rights and the right earn a living. It’s not a limited government position. E-verify ought to be abolished.

Tags: , , , , ,

HB 608 & SB 2371: The State Will Track Your Child’s Usefulness From K-12 To Employment

– February 24, 2011Posted in: MSLP Articles

HB 608 & SB 2371, SLDS MississippiUPDATE 03/02/11: The Senate took up HB 608 today. In less than 30 seconds, after reading the title of the bill and adopting a “strike-all” amendment (which didn’t change the effect of the bill), the Senate voted unanimously to pass HB 608.

HB 608 passed with no questions asked – no debate – not even a peep – from the so-called limited government Republicans. You can hear the discussion of the bill in it’s 1min 30sec entirety below.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

UPDATE 03/14/11: SB 2371 was signed into law by Governor Haley Barbour. SB 2371 was a companion bill to HB 608. The bills are basically identical in scope and purpose.

Every single Senator and Representative voted in favor of this bill, with the exception of only 4 who voted present or didn’t vote at all. Still, no one has asked any questions and no one has volunteered any answers about the state and federal government tracking Mississippi public school children for their usefulness. The law takes effect “and shall be in force” July 1, 2013.

Original Article

HB 603 and SB 2371 both passed their respective chambers almost unanimously. HB 608 passed the House 117-2. The Senate passed SB 2371 by a vote of 48-0. The bills are identical.

Both HB 603 and SB 2371 would create the “State Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)”, which would “provide for development and interagency participation to link education with employment.” Congratulations. The young person you call your child is now one step closer to becoming a well-schooled utility for the State of Mississippi. No, I’m not making this stuff up…

The system will allow stakeholders and policymakers to access data on state residents from birth to the workforce to drive accountability and investment decisions.

The Orwellian language of these Republican/Democrat-backed bills certainly raises a lot of questions – more questions than what I’ve been able to find answers for, but none of which really matter sense it appears to be a done deal with hardly any debate in Jackson. Looks like it’s simply a matter of which version will advance to be signed into law by Governor, Haley Barbour.

For starters, the US Dept of Ed fact sheet states that the participating state (yes, SLDS is another federal bribe to control local school districts) is required to report to them:

“An unique identifier for every student that does not permit a student to be individually identified (except as permitted by federal and state law)“

So personally identifiable information on your child will be shared throughout certain state and federal agencies and it’s restrictions are only limited by the state and federal laws that have already been enacted, or laws they may deem necessary to enact in the future.

It’s not clear which of the current laws contained in the 25,000 pages of the US Code or the 150,000 pages of federal regulations that the US Dept of Ed’s SLDS fact sheet is referring to. If I had to guess I would say that one section of law it would certainly be referring to is the Family Educational Rights And Privacy Act (FERPA). FERPA allows schools to disclose your child’s information, without your consent, to other agencies and organizations including:

  • The Comptroller General of the United States;
  • The Attorney General of the United States;
  • The US Secretary of Education;
  • State and local educational authorities;
  • Other schools to which a student is transferring;
  • Specified officials for audit or evaluation purposes;
  • Appropriate parties in connection with financial aid to a student for the purposes of
    • Determine eligibility for the aid;
    • Determine the amount of the aid;
    • Determine the conditions for the aid; or
    • Enforce the terms and conditions of the aid;
  • Organizations conducting certain studies for or on behalf of the school;
  • Accrediting organizations to carry out their accrediting functions;
  • To comply with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena;
  • Appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies; and
  • State and local authorities, within a juvenile justice system, pursuant to specific State law.

    • And,

    Schools may disclose, without consent, “directory” information such as a student’s name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. However, schools must tell parents and eligible students about directory information and allow parents and eligible students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose directory information about them.

Reading HB 608, I don’t know how Section 1(1)(c), for example, could be implemented without attaching the child’s name to his “birth to workforce” data. Section 1(1)(c) of HB 608 reads:

“Developing an early warning system, which allows the state to intervene early, improving the graduation rates in high school and college”

So a few questions I have are: 1) Will the Mississippi SLDS initially, or will it possibly in the future, in any way attach the child’s name to the data that’s shared across the various state agencies listed in HB 608 and SB 2371; 2) what agencies and individuals could be authorized in the future to access this data on individual children; 3) for what purposes will each agency and individual use the data on individual children; 4) will this effect policymakers desire or decisions in such a way that it could restrict the freedoms or choices of a public school student or give one an unfair advantage over another; and 5) what happens if the security of this incredible amount of personal data is compromised?

Of course, any answer given to these questions would be pure speculation since SLDS is simply a tool. The way this tool is used will be determined by politicians and department heads as the tool progresses. HB 168 and SB 2371 both initially grant the following state agencies access to this data:

(a) The Mississippi Department of Education (MDE);
(b) The State Board for Community and Junior Colleges (SBCJC);
(c) The Board of Trustees of State Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL);
(d) The State Workforce Investment Board (SWIB);
(e) The Mississippi Department of Employment Security (MDES);
(f)  The Mississippi Department of Human Services (MDHS); and
(g) The State Early Childhood Advisory Council (SECAC)

As well as:

Any agencies or entities added to SLDS shall provide a representative to the SLDS Governing Board and be governed in the same manner as the initial agencies and entities.

These bills certainly deserve to be studied more closely than what I’ve given them here. I encourage you to read it for yourself and discuss it with your legislator. The legislators that support the creation of the SLDS ought to be grilled on it’s potential to restrict the choices and freedoms of publicly schooled students in the future.

But it seems to me that HB 608 and SB 2371 creates a grid in which the state’s economic, employment, political, judicial, correctional, health, and welfare agencies are connected for the sole purpose of rearing your child in the most efficient and useful manner possible and directing their usefulness according to where the data says they belong in the workforce.

You know what I have a little bit of a problem with? I have a problem with the government analyzing the differences in individuals, running data on children in this case, because it tends to give our do-good law-makers the desire to manipulate the differences out of individuals until they’re all alike rather than letting folks get along with one another just the way they are.

So What Can You Do?

  1. Call your legislator and get the facts about HB 608 and SB 2371. Each bill has already passed the house it originated in so it’s nearly a done deal. Still, contact your legislator (and other legislators) at (601) 359-3770 and tell them to explain this bill before they vote in favor it. Ask them to answer the questions I listed above. If they can’t explain the bill, or if it sounds as Orwellian to you as it does to me, tell them to vote against it!
  2. Separating School & State is one of the best books written on the origin and nature of Public Schooling and why public schooling should be abolished – or why you should at least stop participating in it. Buy it, read it, and share it with others.
  3. Look into your homeschooling options. Mississippi’s homeschooling laws are pretty relaxed compared to other states. What sacrifices can your family make to give your children a better education and spend more quality time with them? Checkout the community at HomeSchool.com and learn the homeschooling laws in Mississippi at HSLDA.org.
  4. If you aren’t already, consider getting involved with the Mississippi Libertarian Party by making a small contribution and even attending our upcoming state convention on April 16th in Oxford, MS. Libertarians want to put your family back in control of your family’s decisions, but we can’t do it without the generous contributions from concerned parents like you. Every little bit helps.
Tags: , ,

HB 168 Would Specifically Legalize Video-Taping Law Enforcement Officers

– February 23, 2011Posted in: Blog, MSLP Articles

UPDATE: After passing the House, HB 168 died in the Senate Jud A committee on March 1st’s deadline. For the 2nd year in a row, Senator Joey Fillingane (R) killed the bill all by himself by refusing to allow the Jud A committee members to vote on it.

Don’t let Joey Fillingane’s authoritarian move stop you from filming your interactions with law enforcement officers. If you don’t relentlessly assert your rights and ensure your rights aren’t being violated – you don’t have any. See #2 and #3 below.

Some of our legislators get a little confused when a bill comes across their desk that would actually limit the government’s power. These bills usually invoke a “I don’t know why this law is necessary,” response from the authoritarian-leaning legislators. Such is the case with Senator Joey Fillingane (R) when HB 168 landed on his desk.

HB 168 would reaffirm every individual’s right to hold law enforcement personnel accountable for their actions by making it clear that it is, in fact, perfectly legal to video-tape them while on duty. But Joey Fillingane doesn’t see the need for such a law and he hasn’t heard a legitimate claim for it.

From WDAM.com:

Fillingane says he hasn’t seen the bill, and although he doesn’t want to judge it before reading it, he sees no use for it.

…

Fillingane says so far he hasn’t heard a legitimate claim for the need for citizens to record law officers and says police dash cameras do the job.

Maybe Senator Fillingane should re-read the Mississippi Constitution he swore to support. It makes a pretty clear argument in support of HB 168. Section 13 of the Mississippi Constitution clearly states the individual right to free speech and a free press is a sacred right:

The freedom of speech and of the press shall be held sacred

Yes, sacred. Furthermore, an individual’s right to free speech is no more and no less sacred than the freedom of the press. They are equally sacred and the laws, as well as the individual actions of our public officials, ought to reflect this since every law-maker and every public official swore an oath to “…faithfully support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Mississippi”.

The MS Constitution also addresses the relationship between individuals and the government and it’s police powers. Because government originates with the people, the people have the inherent right to regulate the government and it’s police powers. Since the people have the inherent and constitutional right to regulate their government and the government’s police, we ought to be allowed the peaceful tools to do so without fear of being tossed in a cage:

SECTION 5.
All political power is vested in, and derived from, the people; all government of right originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.

SECTION 6.
The people of this state have the inherent, sole, and exclusive right to regulate the internal government and police thereof, and to alter and abolish their constitution and form of government whenever they deem it necessary to their safety and happiness; provided, such change be not repugnant to the constitution of the United States.

The only current language in the MS Legal Code that addresses filming law enforcement officers, public officials, and other people is § 97-29-63, which states:

Any person who with lewd, licentious or indecent intent secretly photographs, films, videotapes, records or otherwise reproduces the image of another person without the permission of such person when such a person is located in a place where a person would intend to be in a state of undress and have a reasonable expectation of privacy, including, but not limited to, private dwellings or any facility, public or private, used as a restroom, bathroom, shower room, tanning booth, locker room, fitting room, dressing room or bedroom shall be guilty of a felony…

So if the Constitution affirms the natural right of “the people” to regulate the government and it’s police powers, and current law allows filming other people in areas where they have no reasonable expectation of privacy – then what’s the problem? Well, the problem is that when the unauthorized power of an armed agent of the government meets the natural, constitutional, and legal rights of an individual – the individual usually finds himself sitting in a cage. Law enforcement officers can, and often do, tell people to turn the camera off and if you don’t do as he says, he has the power to arrest you and toss you into a cage for the usual “disobeying an officer” or “disorderly conduct”. When such a case goes to court (usually without a jury), it’s the word of a uniformed law enforcement officer against yours.

A law, such as HB 168, that reaffirms every person’s natural right to self-preservation, supports Sections 5, 6, and 13 of the Mississippi Constitution, and is perfectly consistent with current Mississippi law, would specifically restrict law enforcement officers from forcing you into shutting off your camera simply because the law enforcement officer threatens you with arrest. If he does force you to turn the camera off, then you would have the language in HB 168 to use as your defense in court.

One legitimate concern of the opponents of video-taping police officers is that a camera or a camera operator could interfere with a police officer doing his job. However, HB 168 clearly states that it’s legal to video-tape an officer “…provided, that any person videotaping, filming or otherwise recording such duties shall not interfere with the performance of such duties.”

I don’t know of any other legitimate reason why anyone would oppose such a bill. Could you imagine the civil rights movement being any movement at all without the brave camera operators catching the abuses by government officials on film and sharing their images with the rest of America? The images of law enforcement officers using high pressure water hoses, cattle prods, and police dogs against peaceful people would have never reached the hearts and minds of others and it’s unlikely that the civil rights movement would have ever gained momentum had there not been cameras around.

Note: Check your volume before you play each videos below.

I’m not saying all cops use their power to violate your rights. Good cops generally don’t mind being recorded and some even see it as a means to improve the way they handle themselves during an interaction with individuals. Most cops are, in fact, good and decent people – no different than you or I. This law would simply protect folks from the handful of law enforcement officers that enjoy their power a little too much and then try to cover-up their actions by forcing a person to shut the camera off. You can dig around youtube or copblock and find plenty of these instances.

HB 168 is currently sitting in Joey Fillingane’s Senate Jud A Committee – the same committee where it died last year without a vote after passing the House. The Jud A committee members are:

  • Joey Fillingane (R), Chairman
  • W. Briggs Hopson III (R), Vice-Chairman
  • Sidney Albritton (R)
  • Terry C. Burton (R)
  • Kelvin E. Butler (D)
  • Tommy Dickerson (D)
  • Hillman Terome Frazier (D)
  • Jack Gordon (D)
  • Dean Kirby (R)
  • Chris McDaniel (R)
  • Walter Michel (R)
  • T. O. Moffatt (R)
  • Michael Watson (R)
  • Lee Yancey (R)

Remember, law enforcement officers and public officials aren’t above the law. One individual has no right to violate another individual’s rights whether he wears a badge or not. If a public official violates a person’s rights he ought to be held accountable for his actions. Often times, the only way to hold a public official accountable for their abusive actions is to capture the abuse on video. Don’t let Joey Fillingane and the members of Jud A ignore this bill again.

What Can You Do?

  1. Contact the committee members, including Joey Fillingane at (601) 359-3770 and let them know you support HB 168. “No one has spoken to me for or against this bill,” said Senator Joey Fillingane in the WDAM interview.
  2. Know your rights and relentlessly assert your rights, including Section 13 of the MS Constitution. Peacefully asserting your rights to an armed agent of the government is only scary the first few times you do it. :) And, you’ll find that some law enforcement officers are receptive to the ideas of liberty so long as you’re respectful and courteous in presenting them.
  3. Arm yourself with a FlipCam or a similar video camera for a round $100. Or, you can sign up for a Qik.com account and download the free camera app for your smartphone. Qik makes it more difficult for law enforcement officials to delete the video footage you’ve recorded by streaming the video, as you record it, to a secure online account. Remember, after you’ve been arrested your cell phone can be searched without a warrant – says the Supreme Court – and anything they find questionable can lead to a warrant issued to search your house and other property.
  4. Connect with other liberty-minded people within the state and throughout the country. Network with others and help spread the libertarian message with friends and family. Networking with other libertarians is also helpful if you ever find yourself arrested for one of the many victimless crimes.
  5. Consider making a contribution to the Libertarian Party of Mississippi. Your generous donations help us educate the public on the ideas of individual liberty and elect principled Libertarians to federal, state, and local office to repeal and block laws that are contrary to the ideas of individual freedom.
Tags: , , , ,

Eminent Domain Reform In Mississippi Is A Scam

– January 25, 2011Posted in: MSLP Articles

Haley Barbour, Phil Bryant, Steven Palazzo, and Eminent Domain Abuse in MississippiSince the Kelo decision, Mississippi is 1 of only 7 states who has failed to reform eminent domain and protect a person’s right to keep and own property (See Susette Kelo’s video). However, there has been a tremendous amount of energy spent by a few ambitious politicians (Haley Barbour, Phil Bryant, Steven Palazzo, Bennie Turner) manipulating the language in bills and trying to trick voters into believing that private property rights are being respected in Mississippi.

They are not. In Mississippi your private property can be stripped from you at any time and be given to another private entity.

Here’s how the eminent domain scam works in Mississippi…

Article 3, Section 17 of the MS Constitution states that, whenever property is being taken by eminent domain, the question of whether it is a public use or not is a judicial question – not a legislative question. This was the “Constitutional” argument made by Haley Barbour, Steven Palazzo, and others (both Democrats and Republicans) when they voted down eminent domain reform (HB 803) in 2009.

Yet, every year these same ambitious politicians defy the Constitution, as well as their own argument against eminent domain reform through the legislative process, by using the legislative process to expand the powers of eminent domain for private use.

Mississippi Constitution:

Section 17, Article 3 of the Mississippi Constitution:

Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use, except on due compensation being first made to the owner or owners thereof, in a manner to be prescribed by law; and whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be public shall be a judicial question, and, as such, determined without regard to legislative assertion that the use is public.

Here’s the most recent history of eminent domain legislation in Mississippi

2007

1/12/2007

HC 18 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional amendment is killed by Hob Bryan, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Republican Lt Gov Amy Tuck.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2007/pdf/history/HC/HC0018.htm

Note about HC 18: Rep Steven Palazzo would not vote in favor of private property rights again until 2010 – one week before he announced he was running against (D) Gene Taylor and (L) Tim Hampton. He voted for the same language in the Constitutional Amendment in 2007 and 2010, that he voted against in 2008 and 2009. Yet, he espoused to be a defender of private property rights on the 2010 campaign trail. A lot of folks were misled or chose to ignore Palazzo’s record.

2/01/2007 and 3/14/2007

HB 1547 – Removed the requirement to obtain:

(a) A determination that the entity qualifies as one to which the Legislature has granted the power of eminent domain;

(b) A determination that the entity has complied with state law in invoking the statutory power of eminent domain; or

(c) A certificate of public convenience and necessity for the particular taking in question.

…from the “applicable state regulatory agency” or Federal Energy Regulatory Commission before eminent domain powers could be used.

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2007/pdf/history/HB/HB1547.htm

2/07/2007

HB 1209 – Would have allowed the state inland port authority to sell land, which was taken by eminent domain, back to the original owner or the children of the owner – even with a written statement by the state inland port authority that the property isn’t being used.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2007/pdf/history/HB/HB1209.htm

4/27/2007

SB 2001 – added “powertrain component manufacturers” to the list of Mississippi Major Economic Impact Authority (MMEIA) projects in which eminent domain could be used to take property from one private owner and given to another private owner for private use. It also expanded “immediate possession” eminent domain powers. MMEIA was already given “immediate possession” powers by our legislature, but SB 2001 added to the list of MMEIA’s private projects in which “immediate possession” could be used and also granted “immediate possession” powers to “any county” for the use of roads, bridges, utilities, right-of-ways, etc to the new private development.

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/20071E/pdf/history/SB/SB2001.htm

“Immediate possession” allows your property to be appraised and the title taken from you and given to another private owner within 5 days. You may still live in your home, or use your office or church, but the new owner can now legally enter your property against your wishes.

MS Immediate Possession Law: http://www.michie.com/mississippi/lpext.dll/mscode/173d/1ec2/1f4a/1f55?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0#JD_11-27-85

2008

Phil Bryant is sworn in as Lt Governor. He has the responsibility of appointing Chairs of Senate Committees. Phil Bryant, Republican, chose Bennie Turner, Democrat, as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee. No Constitutional Amendment to limit eminent domain between 2008 and 2010 has made it past his desk.

2/07/2008

HB 591 – Would have restricted eminent domain powers to only be used for real public use (roads, bridges, utilities, rights-of-way, government buildings)

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2008/pdf/history/HB/HB0591.xml

2/21/2008

HC 24 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional Amendment is killed by Bennie Turner, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Lt Gov Phil Bryant.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2008/pdf/history/HC/HC0024.xml

2/27/2008 and 4/27/2008

HB 342 – Previously, municipalities could only demolish abandoned houses where drugs were being used or sold. This bill allows them to seize the entire property. (The issue is not that drugs are bad for the neighborhood since demolishing the house would solve the drug problem on the property. The issue is that confiscating the house and land goes too far and doesn’t do any more to prevent the use of drugs in an abandoned house than if the house was demolished.)

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2008/pdf/history/HB/HB0342.xml

5/28/2008

HB 12 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to allow the Dept of Homeland Security to build the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/20081E/pdf/history/HB/HB0012.xml

2009

1/27/2009

SB 2605 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to take private property for existing manufacturing plants

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/SB/SB2605.xml

2/04/2009

HB 803 – Eminent domain reform…

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB0803.xml

A vote in favor of HB 803 would have limited eminent domain powers to be used only for real “public use” (ie – roads, bridges, ports, dams, levees, and utilities). It would have disallowed the use of eminent domain for the purpose of taking property from one person and give it to a corporation or any other non-governmental entity. The bill passed the House. Steven Palazzo voted against it. It passed the Senate, but was vetoed by Gov Haley Barbour. His veto was overriden in the House. Again, Steven Palazzo voted against private property rights when he voted to sustain Governor Barbour’s veto. The Senate voted to sustain Barbour’s veto and HB 803 died.

Ultimately, the purpose of HB 803 was to force the issue to the Supreme Court where they would have to side with the MS Constitution. The Supreme Court would have to rule that when property is taken through eminent domain, whether it will be taken for real public use or not is in fact a judicial question according to the MS Constitution. The MS establishment (both Democrats and Republicans) has defied the MS Constitution by using the legislature to define and redefine “public use” in order to expand eminent domain. Yet, when given the chance to strengthen private property rights by limiting eminent domain powers, Haley Barbour, Steven Palazzo, Billy Hewes (2011 candidate for Lt Governor) and a few other Democrats and Republicans conveniently decide to abide by the Constitution. They are all frauds.

These over-reaching eminent domain laws enacted by the legislature are unConstitutional. Because the laws are unConstitutional – they are illegal. When a property owner is threatened under illegal eminent domain laws – the threat to steal a person’s private property should be considered a criminal act.

2/05/2009

HB 1628 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to confiscate land for “composite component manufacturers in the aerospace industry”

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB1628.xml

2/06/2009

HC 33 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional Amendment is killed by Bennie Turner, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Lt Gov Phil Bryant.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HC/HC0033.xml

2010

2/03/2010

HC 26 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional Amendment is killed by Bennie Turner, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Lt Gov Phil Bryant. This is the same bill Steven Palazzo voted against in 2008 and 2009 – both non-election seasons. However, he voted in favor of it less than 1 week of announcing his candidacy to replace Gene Taylor.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/HC/HC0026.xml

2/09/2010

Rep Steven Palazzo announces his candidacy for US Congress on The Paul Gallo Show. A few months later he would run TV ads claiming, as a MS legislator, he supports private property rights. In fact, no legislator in the State of Mississippi has voted against a person’s right to keep and own property more than Steven Palazzo. Mississippi folks were duped.

2/09/2010

HB 918 as Introduced – Would restrict eminent domain powers to only be used for real public use (roads, bridges, utilities, rights-of-way, government buildings)

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/HB/HB0918.xml

2/10/2010

HB 918 Committee Substitute – Would allow MMEIA to retain it’s eminent domain powers and would mandate that all takings for MMEIA projects would be subject to Judicial review. However, since the MS Constitution doesn’t define “public use”, and since the Kelo decision stated that economic development and tax revenue can be considered “public use”, the courts would rule that taking property from one private owner and giving it to another private owner is Constitutional. So again, this bill would not have limited eminent domain abuse.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/HB/HB0918.xml

3/11/2010

SB 3189 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to confiscate land for solar panel manufacturers

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/SB/SB3189.xml

9/30/2010 – Initiative 31

David Waide, President of Mississippi Farm Bureau Federation, delivered Initiative 31 to the Secretary of State’s office. The amendment will appear on the ballot in 2011. However, the legislature can decide to provide alternative amendments to go on the ballot and voters (if the language of the bill doesn’t confuse voters into leaving the ballot blank, thus, invalid) will be able to vote for the amendment of their choice. The most popular amendment will be added to the MS Constitution, so long as it gets at least 40% of the vote, but will not replace the eminent domain language in Article 3, Section 17 of the MS Constitution.

The truth is that the language in Initiative 31 is still against private property rights and still favors eminent domain abuse. It does not address the issue of using eminent domain to take property from one private owner and giving it to another private owner for private development.

http://www.sos.ms.gov/elections2_initiative0031.aspx

The amendment reads:

“No property acquired by the exercise of the power of eminent domain under the laws of the State of Mississippi shall, for a period of ten years after its acquisition, be transferred or any interest therein transferred to any person, non-governmental entity, public-private partnership, corporation, or other business entity.”

So, the language of the Constitutional Amendment is adapted to fit the current unConstitutional laws that allow private property to be taken from a private owner and given to another private owner for private development and it doesn’t stop the immoral use of “immediate possession”. The only difference is that once the title to your property is acquired (taken) by the government, the title can’t be transferred (given) to a private developer for 10 years. As for who actually holds the title to your private property from the time it is acquired by the government until the time it is handed over to the new private owner – I’m sure our legislators already have plans to fix this little issue.

Hopefully Mississippi’s legislators can muster the political courage (I doubt it) to add a simple alternative amendment to restrict the use of eminent domain to be used only for true “public use” (roads, bridges, utilities, government buildings, etc) rather than for the benefit of rich out-of-state private developers and for our elected official’s own political paybacks and ambitions.

But Is Initiative 31 Even Constitutional?

The bigger question though, is whether or not Initiative 31 is even Constitutional. I don’t necessarily have a problem with Farm Bureau, but I have to wonder if they’re either acting on behalf of the Barbour/Bryant administration or proposing a solution without considering or understanding the legality of it. (Surely FB has sought legal advice or talked with someone who would know that the initiative will likely be found unconstitutional.)

Initiative 31 will likely be challenged in court and it’ll likely be defeated since, according to Section 273(5)(a) of the Mississippi Constitution, an initiative by the people can not be used “for the proposal, modification or repeal of any portion of the MS Bill of Rights”, including the private property language in Section 17. Even tho the language in Initiative 31 doesn’t repeal and replace Section 17, it clearly modifies it and will surely be found unconstitutional.

For example (from a historical perspective), it would be unconstitutional (and immoral) to give blacks the right to vote in the Bill of Rights, then, 30 years later pass a ballot initiative to add to the end of the Constitution “Blacks can have the right to vote so long as they can recite the Preamble to the Constitution and guess within 10 beans how many beans are in a quart jar.”

Unlike people-driven initiatives, constitutional amendments proposed by the legislature can legally modify the MS Bill of Rights. But to do so would be political suicide under the Haley Barbour and the likely Phil Bryant administration after the 2011 election. So in the end, it looks like Initiative 31 is a cop-out for our legislators and the Republican leadership. It’s a continuance of the same scam to fool Mississippians.

How To Abolish Eminent Domain Abuse In Mississippi Immediately

Senate Rule Section 87

Every year a Constitutional Amendment originates in the House, passes the House almost unanimously and dies in the Senate Constitution Committee without a committee vote and without ever going to the full Senate. As mentioned above, the committee chairman that kills this bill every year is a Democrat, currently Bennie Turner, who is hand-picked by a Republican Lt Governor, currently Phil Bryant. Will our next Lt Governor (R-Tate Reeves or R-Billy Hewes) appoint the same, or a similar anti-property rights Senator to head this committee? Or will he choose someone who actually respects property rights?

Section 87 of the MS Senate rules (PDF) allow the Senate to pull any bill out of committee to be voted on the Senate floor without the Chairman’s consent simply by a majority of the Senators petitioning to do so:

87. No bill, resolution, concurrent resolution or measure having been referred to a committee shall be taken from such committee, or the committee be discharged from the consideration thereof, other than by a motion signed by a majority of all Senators elected; except that during the last six (6) days of a session, a majority of the Senators present and voting may call a bill, resolution or concurrent resolution from a committee by a signed motion.

Currently there are 27 Republicans and 25 Democrats in the Mississippi Senate. If Republicans or Democrats in the Mississippi Senate had any respect for the job we actually send them to Jackson to do (protect private property from theft, for example), and if they had any backbone at all – they could easily petition to pull this bill out of committee and put it to a full Senate vote. Let us see who all gets in the way of real eminent domain reform in favor of individuals. They could easily support the private property rights of us little folk in such a way that’s constitutional, but they don’t.

Article 7, Section 190 of the Mississippi Constitution

I believe the powers of eminent domain assumed by the state for economic development purposes are unConstitutional according to Article 7, Section 190.

Article 7: Corporations

SECTION 190: Eminent Domain; Police Powers
The exercise of the right of eminent domain shall never be abridged, or so construed as to prevent the legislature from taking the property and franchises of incorporated companies, and subjecting them to public use; and the exercise of the police powers of the state shall never be abridged, or so construed as to permit corporations to conduct their business in such manner as to infringe upon the rights of individuals or general well-being of the state.

My understanding is that Article 7 Section 190 protects private individuals from the legislature concocting laws that would allow corporations to benefit from the state’s eminent domain powers. After all, if a corporation wants to expand their business into Mississippi then an agent of that corporation must contact the Mississippi Development Authority in order to benefit from the state’s eminent domain powers. Then, at the corporations directions the MDA will decide on the property to be seized, it’s owner evicted, the buildings bulldozed or repurposed, and the property given to the corporation so that it can conduct it’s business – all at the expense of the private individual. Although Mississippi law allows (even encourages) this underhanded tactic, the Mississippi Constitution reads as if it strictly forbids it since no right is greater than secure ownership of private property.

If this is actually the case (libertarians believe it is), then the eminent domain powers given to the state under the Mississippi Major Economic Impact Act are unconstitutional and ought to be abolished.

Compromises at the expense of individuals are a result of the 2 party system and a majority-take-all approach to governing people. It’s this system that grows government power and pits neighbor against neighbor over public policy. Freedom and liberty unites us and allows every person to live our lives as each of us sees fit without worrying that a majority vote will strip of us of our property or freedom. Only time will tell if Mississippians will remain so gullible each election cycle as to believe in Republican and Democrat words despite their own actions.

Also see Mississippi’s “F” on Eminent Domain Reform by the Castle Coalition.

Feel free to comment below if you agree, disagree, or have any ideas to share. We’re always open to hearing what you have to say.

(back to the top)

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Mississippi’s Constitution-Free Zone

– August 19, 2010Posted in: MSLP Articles

Mississippi's 100Mile Constitudtion-Free ZoneGenerally, the 4th amendment to the US Constitution protects every individual from arbitrary stops and seizures. The exception to the 4th amendment is on the US border.

Border agents may stop any person and search their belongings, but that infringement on an individual’s rights has long been allowed only at the US border. To further intrude on an individual’s right to travel freely, the US Supreme Court has redefined the definition of the US Border to include 100 air-miles. According to my quick calculation, that’s from the coastline all the way to Jones County.

According to 2007 population data this 100 air miles includes over 33% (nearly 1,000,000) Mississippi citizens. If Mississippians are truly concerned about the encroachment of the Federal government, as many organizations have shown with “Obamacare”, we should try running the Border Patrol agents back to the coastline.

From the ACLU:

As a result of this claimed authority, individuals who are far away from the border, American citizens traveling from one place in America to another, are being stopped and harassed in ways that our Constitution does not permit.

Border Patrol has been setting up checkpoints inland — on highways in states such as California, Texas and Arizona, and at ferry terminals in Washington State. Typically, the agents ask drivers and passengers about their citizenship.  Unfortunately, our courts so far have permitted these kinds of checkpoints – legally speaking, they are “administrative” stops that are permitted only for the specific purpose of protecting the nation’s borders.  They cannot become general drug-search or other law enforcement efforts.

However, these stops by Border Patrol agents are not remaining confined to that border security purpose.  On the roads of California and elsewhere in the nation – places far removed from the actual border – agents are stopping, interrogating, and searching Americans on an everyday basis with absolutely no suspicion of wrongdoing.

The bottom line is that the extraordinary authorities that the government possesses at the border are spilling into regular American streets.

This trend is also typical of the Bush Administration’s dragnet approach to law enforcement and national security.  Instead of intelligent, competent, targeted efforts to stop terrorism, illegal immigration, and other crimes, what we have been seeing in area after area is an approach that turns us all into suspects. This approach seeks to sift through the entire U.S. population in the hopes of encountering the rare individual whom the authorities have a legitimate interest in.

Click here to learn more about Mississippi’s Constitution-free zone.

Tags: , , ,
Contribute to the Mississippi Libertarian Party