The Bill of Rights is Missing an Amendment – Another Dred Decision By A Lower Court

bill of rights

April 19, 2018 By The Common Constitutionalist


One of greater problems that plague our federal government is that of cross-delegation. What do I mean by this?

I describe this phenomenon as such, owing to the fact that three branches of government are no longer “separate but equal.” As we see by the take-over of government by the federal judiciary, they are clearly the most powerful of the three. The other two branches, the legislative and executive, take to bended knee before them, and as blind mutes, comply with any and every decree. This was clearly not intended by the founders.

However, this cross-delegation can more accurately be described not as a seizing of power and authority of one branch from another, but as a voluntary giving of authority of one branch to another. The legislative branch, devoid of backbone, consistently surrenders its constitutionally mandated authority to the executive branch, giving the President authority he is not entitled to.

Unfortunately, as is often the case today, the three branches of government see the Constitution as nothing more than a conglomeration of gray areas to be interpreted as they wish. National Review described it as the, “disalignment of the various branches of government relative to what the Framers of the U.S. Constitution intended.”

The Constitution does specify the duties of the three branches and assumes that the branches would have the fortitude to carry out their specific duties. They apparently did not envision such a large collection of spineless weasels, eager to give their authority away rather than have to make hard choices.

These supposed gray areas in the Constitution are exactly the reason why the anti-federalists insisted on spelling out a set of basic individual rights in the Bill of Rights.

 Fulfilling a promise to anti-federalists like George Mason, Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams, James Madison introduced his proposed nine amendments on June 8, 1789. The amendments were taken up by the House, and on August 24, the House voted in favor of presenting 17 amendments (first draft) to the states for ratification. Congress then forwarded the proposed Bill of Rights to the Senate. The Senate reduced those 17 to 12 (second draft) and on September 28, 1789, these 12 were submitted to the States for ratification. The process slowed to a crawl, which for something this important was the right tact. Finally, on December 15, 1791, the remaining 10 Amendments were agreed upon by three-quarters of the States and the Bill of Rights was born.

However, in retrospect, there was one original Article, that is desperately needed in today’s three-branch free-for-all environment. Sadly it ended up on the cutting room floor – didn’t make it past the second draft.

This was Article 16, which read:

 “The powers delegated by the constitution to the government of the United States, shall be exercised as therein appropriated, so that the legislative shall never exercise the powers vested in the executive or judicial; nor the executive the powers vested in the legislative or judicial; nor the judicial the powers vested in the legislative or executive.”

This one Article – this one short paragraph, would bring the entire federal government back into Constitutional alignment. The intent of this Article, or Amendment, could not be clearer – that no branch shall ever exercise another’s power, even if voluntarily surrendered to another. This one Article would put an end to the cross-delegation of authority, or “disalignment of the various branches of government.” It should be considered as the 28th Amendment to the Constitution.

Another Dred Decision By A Lower Court

April 22, 2018  By The Common Constitutionalist


Earlier, I posted an article entitled, “The Bill of Rights is Missing an Amendment.”

I began by explaining that we do not have three “separate but equal” branches of government – that the federal judiciary, or Judicial Branch of the federal government, is by far the most powerful and influential branch of the three. The other two are of course the Executive and Legislative.

To this, I had an interesting, yet confusing comment on my YouTube channel regarding my assertion, which is a fact, not an assertion. The commentor stated: “I don’t know why you think the supreme Court is so powerful…” At first I thought they must be kidding, but I don’t think so.


The supreme Court has become the ultimate arbiter of every law and every right in America. Their authority is not to be questioned and their rulings are final and should not be challenged, not withstanding a few dreadful decisions from yesteryear.

But it is not the supreme Court that should be feared as much as the rest of the federal judiciary – the lower courts. These lower courts, district (trial) and circuit (appellate), routinely make consequential decisions that affect the entire nation and beyond. And it is there where the majority of radical leftist judges have been quietly placed.

Just in the past year, several of president Trump’s initiatives have been temporarily or permanently halted by a single leftist judge, like his several attempts at a travel ban and an end to the clearly illegal Obama-concocted DACA program.

Now, yet another out-of-control lower court has rendered a decision that may be the worst yet.

The same day I posted my article on the Bill of Rights, Conservative Review posted an article detailing another runaway decision by a lower court – this time the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Somehow, a three judge panel of this court found in the Constitution an inherent right that the State of Ohio has the obligation to fund a certain private organization. And of course that private organization is Planned Parenthood. What a shocker.

“Today we learned that a federal court can force states to donate taxpayer funds to a criminal enterprise harvesting baby organs,” writes CR.

The warped reasoning of the panel was that Ohio could not withhold public funds due to the other “women’s health services” Planned Parenthood provides. So surely the court must know that Planned Parenthood only uses public funds for those other health services and not abortions. Right.

And what of Planned Parenthood’s political donations of around $30 million for the upcoming midterms? All their financial support will be thrown at leftist candidates, and at least some of that money will come directly from the unwitting taxpayer.

But all this aside, there is no way in Heaven or on Earth that the founders would agree that any private company or organization has a constitutional right to public monies. No way. But somehow, these radicalized lower courts find a way, and because we’ve allowed their rulings to be likened to the Ten Commandments, the other branches of government sit by powerless and say, “What can we do?”

CR writes that, “Once we agree to judicial supremacy, the Left has endless resources to game the system and get enough judges willing to abuse rules of standing and constitutional construction to achieve their outcomes.”

And, I suppose, we’re pretty much there.