Politicians use the term “Rule of Law” whenever there’s a legal issue with which they disagree (and they want to frame that issue with a specific law that supports their disagreement) or one with which they agree (and they want to frame that issue with a specific law that supports their agreement). But they always seem to speak louder about the “Rule of Law” when it supports their position. So what is “The Rule of Law?”
The America of 1787 inherited from medieval England the concept of rule of law, sometimes expressed as “a government of laws, not of men.” You can trace the rise of this principle in English history all the way back to the signing of Magna Charta in the year 1215 when King John found it necessary to guarantee his obedience to English laws. For that matter, medieval English writers on law derived their understanding of the rule of law from ancient Roman jurisprudence.
“The king himself ought not to be under man but under God, and under the Law, because the Law makes the king. Therefore let the king render back to the Law what the Law gives him, namely, dominion and power; for there is no king where will, and not Law, wields dominion.” So wrote Henry de Bracton, “the father of English law,” about the year 1260, during the reign of Henry III. This doctrine that no man is above the law applied not only to kings but also to legislative bodies and judges.
“Rule of Law” has been around for a long time and has since this nation’s inception has been the foundation which supports the entirety of the United States Government. It holds the rules and laws by which America for its lifetime has grown to and maintained the title of being the most legal, impartial, and fair nation on Earth when following the laws of the land.
But it’s under attack — an attack of the worst kind. America’s lawmakers — those who actually are charged by the Constitution with the sole power to craft ALL the laws that rule our lives — have devolved into governing from a murky world of arbitrary determination of the enforcement of certain laws. And it’s never been more obvious than it is today — on the 2020 Presidential debate stage, the responses to a question about a specific U.S. law and how each candidate felt about a specific law. Watch and listen:
Almost every person on that stage is a member of Congress or was formerly. Each understands what the Rule of Law states and what it means. And each when taking their oath of office to serve in Congress and those who serve in other elected positions made a personal commitment to the Rule of Law!
The Congressional Oath of Office:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
As we learned above regarding the source and meaning of the rule of law, the United States Constitution set the basis for the process of the lawful conducting of our citizens. And further, it set the Constitution as the ultimate authority in the determination of the meaning of specific laws that are legally put in place by the various authorities and groups in America.
Who are those “specific authorities and groups in America” who put those laws in place?
We’ll get into that in just a moment in our summary.
The Presidential Debate Question From Hell
Of course to the average American, it may seem gallant to raise one’s hands to defend the helpless that find themselves in U.S. Border Patrol facilities being processed as illegal immigrants for crossing into the United States across the U.S./Mexico border. It may be politically brave to attempt to intervene with suggestions of how to help those illegal immigrants in the conditions in which they find themselves after their crossing into America. But, no matter how gallant or brave those candidates felt when they raised their hands in answer to the question about changing the actual law that terms those illegals as criminals. They do NOT have the right to do so! And that is exactly what the Rule of Law says.
Those illegals — every one of those illegals — broke a specific federal law. Here’s the law, its details, and its penalties for its breaking:
8 U.S. Code § 1325. Improper entry by alien
(a) Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Folks, it is heart-rending to see and hear the heartaches being played out in the lives of thousands of illegal immigrants in our southern states. It’s horrible to see and hear the thousands and thousands of Americans being caught in illegal acts of every imaginable kind in all 50 states — and not many of the acts of breaking the law result in death or injury of others. No matter: according to the Rule of Law, the breaking of U.S. laws is criminal…PERIOD.
Why are thousands dying of opioid overdoses in America every month? Why are thousands of women and children being kidnapped, trafficked, and forced into drug dealing and prostitution every year?
Answer: Not all, but many are allowed to be in positions to perpetuate their law-breaking because someone somewhere in some position of authority made a unilateral decision to either wink at their wrongdoing acts OR when the perpetrators are brought to a place of accountability for their wrongdoing, refusing to prosecute or sentence according to the Rule of Law!
On Wednesday of this week, we will detail the position of “Supreme Leader” or “Dictator” or “King” many on the Left are accusing Donald Trump of desiring and by many of actually acting out in his governing today as U.S. President. Many of those same accusers are the very ones who have made winking at the Rule of Law or just ignoring it the right thing to do.
Let’s be honest: is the border crisis Donald Trump’s fault? It existed long before Donald Trump ever became Candidate Trump. It was a crisis during the Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, and Obama administrations. Did any of these presidents bear any responsibility for any of the lawbreaking that occurred in any area of the United States while they were in office?
Here’s the answer: the only responsibility any president in the United States bears is directly proportionate to his/her role in the execution of the terms of any bills presented to him/her to with a signature make it an American law AND the execution of ALL of the terms included in that law by federal law enforcement individuals under a president’s authority. And that certainly includes holding lawbreakers accountable subject to those laws.
Who controls the laws that go on the books of the Federal Government? Who makes the laws? Who determines the terms and conditions of each and every federal law ever written and signed into being? The U.S. Congress.
So, in essence, these 2020 presidential candidates who raised their hands saying they wanted illegal immigrants to no longer to be treated as criminals under 8 U.S. Code § 1325 are stating they support ignoring the Rule of Law.
Don’t forget: the same holds true when federal law enforcement officers are told to “stand down” when it comes time to enforce the federal law that makes possession of marijuana a felony. Think about that travesty: several states have passed state laws that make the use of recreational marijuana legal in direct conflict with federal law. I’m no legal genius, but the U.S. Constitution makes it very clear that in each of such cases, the Constitution decides the outcome of such a legal dilemma.
But none of those conflicts should remain. The laws can easily be fixed — every one of them that cause social conflict! Think about these:
- The law regarding marijuana being possessed in the U.S. is illegal;
- 8 U.S. Code § 1325 that makes illegal crossings into the U.S. illegal;
- The electoral college being (allegedly) unfair to American voters in determining U.S. Presidents and Vice Presidents;
- The government as constitutionally being comprised of 3 co-equal branches of which no one branch controls either of the other;
ALL of these can be changed!
Who can do that? Most federal laws can be easily changed: 8 U.S. Code § 1325 that makes alien entries in the U.S. illegal can be changed as can marijuana drug laws as can electoral college laws as can the structure of power for the three branches of government.
Congresses MAKES the Law…Congress is the ONLY government entity that can CHANGE the laws in place.
Yes, the electoral college is Constitutional as is the three co-equal branches of government, but Congress can pass Constitutional amendments that then go to each state for ratification. That’s happened 27 times in U.S. history and it can be done again.
Why is it SO hard to get laws set or get laws changed? Because people in America did not all come from the same cookie-cutter philosophy nor do they share just one. And, by the way, we DON’T live in a Democracy. The United States is a “Representative Republic.” In a pure democracy, every person votes on EVERY issue: 1 vote for 1 person x however many people that are citizens. The American forefathers felt that was unfeasible in a country so large and diverse. Therefore the Constitution was set and determined all such issues to be set by a body elected by the American people to represent each American in each town in each state in each region of the country on ALL federal issues that needed to be controlled by laws. That group — the ONLY entity that makes laws — is the United States Congress.
Do you know why there are so many people being held for illegal entry into the United States at our southern border? It’s not Donald Trump, it wasn’t Barack Obama or George Bush or Bill Clinton or George H.W. Bush who needed to and could fix it. It’s the United States Congress. They’re the ONLY ones who can make this right.
The American people need to ask one question about our southern border problem and ONLY ONE QUESTION: Why does Congress continue to refuse to take the action necessary — ALL the action necessary to fix the problem?
The answer: “We the People” can and should make the necessary changes to fix the problem by changing the U.S. Congress.
That’s the way “The Rule of Law” works!