11th amendment video

This video gives more depth into the 11th amendment and how it grants immunity from federal ruling in a suit against them.

Amendment number 11

"judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State"

This states that the United States does not have jurisdiction in a lawsuit against a state from an individual. This gives the state a level of soveriegnty.

The reason the amendment was ratified, was the case of Chisholm vs Georgia.

Chisholm vs Georgia

It is unfair that the US forced Georgia to pay despite their sovereign choice to not attend. I feel that this amendment is a positive impact because if it was not their, many people would sue the states in hopes that the US government would grant them their suits without representation from the state.

A display of power

This article displays the individual power that the states have over the federal government.

War Bonds Retribution

Numero Dias

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This amendment basically states that the power the federal government has is that in which we as the people and the states give them. This is the amendment that keeps the people in power over what the federal government does and does not do.

9th amendment

The 9th amendment is a silent one that gives Americans rights that they don't even realize. We have rights that are stated outside the constitution. Many laws that we are faced with can be considered unconstitutional if fought against under the 9th amendment. This amendment gives us the implication that we have the right to privacy.

In Virginia a man is being charged with indecent exposure in his OWN HOME!!!

Indecent Exposure

I am in utter disgust that this woman can have charges on this man for indecent exposure when it was her that stopped to look long enough to take photos. Had it been a man stopping to take photos of a female, it would have been peeping tom charges and she would have had his ass put up as a sexual criminal. I think this woman should be charged for taking photos of a naked man while he was in his own home.

the 9th amendment

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

This amendment states that though the rights listed are set in stone, there are other rights of the people that are not listed and due to this amendment, they are protected.

For example, we have the right to dance and listen to music (forgive the Footloose reference) but it is not stated in the constitution that we have the right to dance and listen to music. This is an implied human right and tradition.

Speaking of Footloose, this was a modern day Footloose issue in Arizona.

#8 Do no look ahead if you have a weak stomach.

DO NOT CONTINUE IF YOU HAVE A WEAK STOMACH OR ARE EASLY DISTURBED.

This is my disclaimer.

*

*

*

*

*

*

These two pictures(top row) are of Allen Lee Davis (Tiny) during and after his execution in a Florida electric chair on July 8, 1999

Pictured left is a convulsing body during the electrocution process. Right is a picture of an electric chair. These chairs would have a person strapped in with arm and leg restraints, a wet sponge would be placed on the persons head and the person would be blind folded and gagged. Then, a head restraint would be placed with what looked like a metal helmet on top. The switch would then be flipped and the person in the chair would suffer excrutiating pain from jolts of electricity almost greater than lightening almost every time endind in death.

If you notice in the top pictures, the hair on his head is completely gone, eyebrows are singed, the skin is severely burned, and he has hemoreged causing his nose to bleed profusely. These are the effects of the electric chair more often than not. The stench from the elecrocuted human flesh and hair would have been nausiating.

Is this cruel and unusual punishment? You can decide for yourself.

Number 8

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."



The excessive bail and fines imposed protects the minor offenders. This is so that someone speeding doesn't get a $1500 fine for doing 10 mph over. Thankfully we have this amendment or we would suffer financially from fines and bails that are excessively unneccesary.

Cruel and unusual punishment ban is an absolute neccessity for a just system. If you steal a candy bar and the store clerk breaks your finger for it this is a cruel punishment for something that could have been settled monetarily.

Do you consider the electric chair cruel and unusual punishment?

This article talks about the supreme court ruling it unconstitutional.

Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Personally I agree with this. I am not against the death penalty but I don't believe in torture. I understand why many may believe in the "eye for an eye" methods. If someone tortures and kills another then they should have a slow agonizing death...I can understand why someone would agree but torturing another doesn't bring back the souls that were lost. I think that a more humane death penalty would be more productive for the heinous criminals that deserve the death penalty.

Navigating Small Claims

Small claims

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

This amendment inhibits the use of small claims courts. Which brings about Judge Judy and other television judges.

This amendment has been interpreted differently to fit in with the modern times. Think, back when this was written $20 was quite a bit of money. Today the monetary amount has risen.

"Any person or business with a civil claim that does not exceed $3,000.00 may bring a suit in small claims court. The $3,000.00 limit does not include court costs and interest on the $3,000.00 which the judge may award you. You may still file a claim if the amount exceeds $3,000.00. However, if you choose to do this, you give up your right to claim any amount exceeding $3,000.00 both in your present suit and in any other claim involving the same person or business and the same issues."

Missouri Bar

His 6th amendment right

In this story, a man is pleading to maintain his legal citizenship after being given bad counsel advice in a 2001 drug trial.

His 6th amendment right

The fairness of this article is complicated. The defendant did plead guilty to drug charges but now faces deportation despite having legal citizen status. Is this a fair deal? What about others who may or may not be facing deportation due to guilty pleas upon advisement of their attorneys? I agree with the idea that judges should include the disclaimer statement. It is unfair that a defendant pleads guilty unbeknownst to them that they could be facing deportation afterwards.

Nummer Zex

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.




As stated in the 6th amendment, the right to a speedy and public trial is stated. This is open to interpretation depending on who you are. The wait time between charge and trial can take months even up to years. I personally do not find this speedy. That's too much time in between for one to change their story, witnesses memories fade, facts get twisted. Public trial by an impartial jury is something I can agree with. This prevents the judge from making a biased decision based on your crime and it allots for a non bias jury to present your verdict. The State and District wherein is a preventative measure to keep one who commits a crime in KC,MO from getting charged in KC,KS. If one flees from a state in which the crime has taken place, they cannot be charged in another state should they be apprehended. They must be returned to the state in which the crime was committed in order to be charged. One must be aware of the charges that they are on trial for. The next part I don't completely agree with either. If I am a witness to a murder I do not want the murderer on trial to know that I am the one bearing witness against them. This statement is why we have the Witness Protection Program. The ability to choose a witness to vouge for you is a privilege held by the Constitution. The access to council is also a privilege. Fortunately for many of those who commit crimes, they can hire someone that can talk their way through difficulties for them. For those who are not very intelligent speakers, this is quite possibly a life saver.
 
 
Speedy Trial

Under the 5th

Under the 5th amendment my property, my personal testimony, and my right to have a jury present is protected. Nor can I be subject to loss of life liberty or property. As an American citizen, I value this amendment.

In other countries around the world, people may be held imprisoned, tortured, even murdered for crimes they may or may not have committed. With having the statement that no one can be punished for a criminal offense without a grand jury, I am protected.

It is common now to watch a tv shoe where someone is on trial in which they plead the 5th. This is not something that only people on tv are capable of doing. If one finds themselves in a cross examination on trial, in order to not convict themselves, they must be careful with what they say. The cross examiner is looking for you to slip up and bear witness on yourself. You have the right to not be a witness against yourself, only under our 5th amendment.

One of the bigger fighting issues is the just compensation issue. If a government run organization wants to utilize your property for any sort of public us, be it public building, highway or road, or public entertainment/recreation facility, you must be compensated for that which you have given up. The standard of compensation is the fair market value of the property at hand. If we were in many other countries, the government may be able to just walk in, kick me out and take over my house for any other purpose and I am very thankful that our government cannot do that.

I plead the 5th

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.



In this one amendment, so many items are covered it's kind of hard to interpret. The first part of this one means that no one can be prosecuted for a major crime without the use of a grand jury. I.E. If I kidnapped someone I could not receive punishment for it unless I had been tried in a court with a grand jury present. Unless, it was a crime committed within military services during time of war. I.E. the instance where the US troops took advantage of the Iraqi prisoners, tortured, beat, even killed them. Photos were released, an investigation was put into effect, and an independent panel was formed to review the evidence. Several were found guilty, demoted, fined, discharged, and other several criminal punishments were instilled.

Here is one of the photos released.

Next is the issue of Double Jeopardy. No person shall be charged of the same crime twice. For example, the OJ trials. When OJ was convicted of not guilty, and they found the bloody glove as new evidence. However, because OJ was found Not Guilty under the 5th amendment, he could not be tried again for that crime despite new evidence.

One shall not be compelled to be a witness against himself.

To take the 5th, is the refusal to testify on the ground that the testimony might tend to incriminate the witness in a crime, based on the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution which provides that "No person....shall be compelled to be a witness against himself," applied to state courts by the 14th Amendment. The term became famous during televised Senate committee hearings on organized crime in 1951, when a series of crime bosses "took the Fifth."

No private property shall be taken for public use, without just compensation.

For example if I own my house and the government wants to build a freeway in it's place, they must pay me fair market value in compensation for my house.

Another example is here: Just Compensation Case

Nobel Peace Prize, Really?

As of the morning of Friday Oct. 9, 2009 Barack Obama is the official winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. But for what reason? Barack has given 3 speeches promoting peace and APOLOGIZING for our nations economic gluteny. Really? Basically this is saying that Obama has promoted the idea of peace. How about when Clinton negotiated the release of 3 US citizens from Korea a few months ago? That was definately not award worthy : / How about the individuals who serve in the US Peace Corps everyday, or those who serve in our military to "help bring PEACE to the middle east" or how about those protesting their tyrannical governments putting their lives out there for the peace of their countries? If non of those are award worthy, then how can we promote that talking about the idea of peace is Nobel worthy let alone little more than news worthy. I speak of peace everyday, I speak of solutions for peace, many of us talk about the peace movements everyday. Why is it that the recognitition of this glorious prize goes to a man who only speaks of peace but has yet to provide solidified evidence of potential worldly peace?

Yes, we can take pride in knowing that our president has been awarded the NobelPP but Jimmy Carter was awarded it in 1997. Can we take pride in knowing that one of the most prestigeous prizes has been awarded to someone who has yet to earn it? Speeking of peace and creating peace are two different stories.