Natural #Law and the Legitimate Authority of the United States @Nuzzle

march 15, 2013 by david j. shestokas

filed under: constitution and its people, constitution educational series, guest commentary & reflections, uncategorized tagged with: aquinas, bill of rights, constitution, declaration of independence, founding fathers, john locke, natural law, obama, supreme court, thomas jefferson

Government needs a basis to exercise authority over people. Citizens must accept government authority.  A government lacking acceptance of the people over whom it exercises authority will not endure.  Such acceptance comes from fear, tradition or philosophy.

Dictators obtain authority by instilling fear of disobedience in the populace. A theocracy ordained by God arises from religious traditions.  A monarchy combines religious traditions[1] and fear of the monarch’s absolute authority. Communists have gained power with a philosophy based upon the “dictatorship of the proletariat”.[2]  The United States was founded upon a philosophy of Natural Law as the source of legitimate legal authority for government.

Government by Philosophy:  Understanding, Acceptance & Consistent Conduct

For a government founded on philosophy to maintain its authority, three things are needed:

1. An understanding by the people of the philosophy
2. An acceptance by the people of the philosophy
3. Conduct by the government consistent with the philosophy
4. Consent of the Governed

Declaration of Independence Established Natural Law the Organizing Principle of the United States

As announced in the Declaration of Independence, the founding philosophical principle of the United States is Natural Law:

 “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people … to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them …” (emphasis added)

- See more at: http://www.shestokas.com/uncategorized/natural-law-and-the-legitimate-authority-of-the-united-states/#sthash.EYUN5oEz.dpuf

Natural #Law and the Legitimate Authority of the #US

March 15, 2013 by david j. shestokas

filed under: constitution and its people, constitution educational series, guest commentary & reflections, uncategorized tagged with: aquinas, bill of rights, constitution, declaration of independence, founding fathers, john locke, natural law, obama, supreme court, thomas jefferson

Government needs a basis to exercise authority over people. Citizens must accept government authority.  A government lacking acceptance of the people over whom it exercises authority will not endure.  Such acceptance comes from fear, tradition or philosophy.

Dictators obtain authority by instilling fear of disobedience in the populace. A theocracy ordained by God arises from religious traditions.  A monarchy combines religious traditions[1] and fear of the monarch’s absolute authority. Communists have gained power with a philosophy based upon the “dictatorship of the proletariat”.[2]  The United States was founded upon a philosophy of Natural Law as the source of legitimate legal authority for government.

Government by Philosophy:  Understanding, Acceptance & Consistent Conduct

For a government founded on philosophy to maintain its authority, three things are needed:

1. An understanding by the people of the philosophy
2. An acceptance by the people of the philosophy
3. Conduct by the government consistent with the philosophy

- See more at: http://www.shestokas.com/uncategorized/natural-law-and-the-legitimate-authority-of-the-united-states/#sthash.Lhi3CxcL.dpuf

Daily Opinion Summaries U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals - #criminal law, #legal ethics,

Richardson v. City of Chicago Docket: 13-2467 Opinion Date: January 22, 2014 Judge: Easterbrook Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Legal Ethics Off-duty Officer Macon argued with Richardson about Macon’s former girlfriend. Macon fired his gun at Richardson but missed. When on-duty officers arrived, Macon said that Richardson had struck him with a baseball bat. Richardson was arrested and charged with assault and battery. After the charges were dismissed, Richardson filed suit, with 39 claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and state law against Chicago, Macon, the arresting officers, and others. Chicago was dismissed before trial because municipalities are not vicariously liable under section 1983, and the district judge found that none of the city’s policies (including its training regimens) was constitutionally deficient. The jury rejected claims against the other defendants, but decided in Richardson’s favor on one claim, concerning the shot Macon fired, and awarded $1 in nominal damages plus $3,000 in punitive damages. Macon did not appeal, nor did Chicago, which under Illinois law must indemnify Macon for the $1 but not the punitive award. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988, Richardson sought more than $675,000 in fees. The district judge awarded $123,000, noting that the firm’s billing did not allow non‑compensable time to be separated out. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the award as “generous, considering Richardson’s recovery.” http://j.st/vq7 View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

United States v. Foley Docket: 13-1386 Opinion Date: January 22, 2014 Judge: Hamilton Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law Foley was convicted of three counts of producing child pornography, one count of distributing child pornography, one count of taking a child across state lines for the purpose of a sex act, and one count of possessing child pornography. Foley appealed, arguing that government’s evidence failed to satisfy the commerce element of those charges (18 U.S.C. 2251(a)) and that the district court improperly admitted evidence of a prior sexual assault under Federal Rule of Evidence 413, causing unfair prejudice. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. Foley’s storage devices (hard drives manufactured in China and in Thailand) could be considered by a jury as material used in “production” sufficient to satisfy the commerce element. The disputed testimony was relevant to Foley’s propensity to commit sexual crimes against children, and to his intent and motive; given the overwhelming evidence of the sexual assault, there was little risk of prejudice. http://j.st/vqi View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Chasensky v. Walker Docket: 13-1761 Opinion Date: January 22, 2014 Judge: Manion Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Communications Law, Government & Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law In Wisconsin, Register of Deeds is an elected position. If a vacancy occurs mid-term, the governor may appoint an interim Register for any unexpired portion of the term. The Marinette County Register announced her mid-term retirement. Chasensky, then employed as Chief Deputy Register of Deeds, sought the interim appointment. Chasensky was interviewed by Esser, Walker’s appointments official, who informed Chasensky that he would forward her application to Governor Walker for appointment to the position. Esser subsequently learned that Chasensky was involved in a personal bankruptcy proceeding. Esser informed Chasensky that Walker would not appoint her as interim Register. Chasensky claims that Werwie, Walker’s official spokesperson, publically broadcast that she was not appointed because she was in a bankruptcy proceeding and that “[d]erogatory comments and innuendo regarding [her] bankruptcy, personal financial matters and character which impugned and harmed [her] professional and personal reputation were intentionally publically disclosed by Governor Walker and Mr. Werwie” when Governor Walker spoke on the FOX television network. Werwie publically announced that Walker had planned to appoint her until he learned of her bankruptcy. In her suit alleging violation of privacy rights, employment rights, and of 11 U.S.C. 525(a) (bankruptcy discrimination), the district court held that the defendants waived qualified immunity by failing to raise it before their motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The Seventh Circuit reversed; the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from Chasensky’s privacy and equal protection claims. http://j.st/vqJ View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

United States v. Cheek Docket: 12-2472 Opinion Date: January 22, 2014 Judge: Manion Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law From 2002–2003, Cheek sold marijuana and crack cocaine to a drug dealer, Eason. While Cheek was in prison in 2004, his associate supplied the drugs. After his release, Cheek went back to selling drugs. He was incarcerated again in 2008, but informed Eason and others that he would resume selling drugs. Law enforcement persuaded Eason to perform controlled buys and record his interactions with Cheek. With court authorization, law enforcement intercepted more than 20,000 phone and text conversations from Cheek. Cheek was convicted of conspiring to possess and distribute more than 280 grams of crack cocaine and more than 100 kilograms of marijuana from 2001 to 2011; intending to distribute more than 28 grams of crack cocaine in August, 2010; intending to distribute marijuana on March 23, 2011; and using a telephone on February 11 and 23, 2011, to facilitate the drug conspiracy. Before trial, the government indicated, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 851, intent to seek an enhanced sentence based on seven prior felony drug convictions. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence of 576 months, rejecting challenges to testimony about the meaning of drug code words. The court also rejected challenges to the sentence: that the court failed to comply with section 851(b); violated constitutional rights, by enhancing Cheek’s sentence beyond the 480-month statutory maximum, because the jury did not find beyond a reasonable doubt that Cheek was convicted of the prior felonies supporting the enhancement; that the court erred in imposing the obstruction of justice enhancement and failed to meaningfully consider mitigation arguments. http://j.st/vTy View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar