Why COVID Orders Are Not Law and the Many Ways They Could Be Stopped

When news of COVID lockdown orders began to be reported back in early 2020, my immediate concern was not over the virus but the lawfulness of the orders. Yes, the virus matters and should be researched by doctors so they can advise their patients as to the best methods of prevention and/or treatment. However, without the rule of law, we have no protection of our God-given rights, including the right to life. Therefore, rights and the rule of law are paramount, even above COVID.

I quickly observed that the lockdown and shutdown orders being issued violated God-given rights, were not constitutionally authorized, and therefore lacked the force of law. As the orders that were promised to be for only a few weeks dragged on into months, it became clear we’d been lied to and that action needed to be taken to restore the rule of law.

I had already been pondering the many ways such violations could and should be stopped and how the usurpation of power by governors could be put in check. However, neither elected officials, political leaders, political parties, nor the big-name organizations of the right seemed ready to step up to the plate and provide the bold and decisive action needed. Without such leadership, the rank and file were effectively sheep without a shepherd, able only to bleat out a modicum of disapproval at their rights being violated by executive orders.

Before discussing the actions that could and should have been taken to put an immediate stop to the violations, there needs to be an understanding of God-given rights and the rule of law that lie at the foundation of this matter.

Continue reading “Why COVID Orders Are Not Law and the Many Ways They Could Be Stopped”

Qasem Soleimani, Iran, and the Rule of Law

As with most political issues, there are those who praise the United States assassination of Iranian general, Qasem Soleimani, and those who decry it. And, as per usual, the division is mostly along party lines, with some calling it wise, virtuous, and a necessary act that will prevent war with Iran, while others call it foolish, evil, and an unnecessary act that will lead to war with Iran.

What is also as per usual is the fact that most are merely arguing for or against the act, but few are asking questions and even fewer are discussing matters of principle and the rule of law. My friend, Jake MacAulay, of the Institute on the Constitution, was the first that I’m aware of to actually drag the U.S. Constitution into the debate in his weekly commentary.

The first questions that Christian people committed to honoring God, upholding the U.S. Constitution, and maintaining the rule of law must always ask are, 1) What does the word of God say? 2) What does the U.S. Constitution say? 3) What will limit the power of government and maximize liberty? To fail to ask these three questions is to throw ourselves open to Godlessness, lawlessness, and tyranny. Continue reading “Qasem Soleimani, Iran, and the Rule of Law”

Syria, the U. S. Constitution, and the War Powers Resolution

In the wake of the U. S. missile strike on the Syrian air base believed to have been used to mount a chemical weapons attack, there is no lack of the usual debate about, “it’s right, it’s wrong; it’s good, it’s bad; we should have, we shouldn’t have.” Most of the discussion revolves around personal opinion based on either pragmatic reasoning, or emotional feelings. A few are going beyond that level of debate and actually asking Constitutional questions.

I’m a bottom line kind of guy. I want to get to the root of a matter. All of the discussion about Assad, Russia, and ISIS; the TV news talking heads, so-called “experts,” and your favorite talk radio personality spouting the party line; even democrat vs republican, and liberal vs conservative; these all obfuscate the foundational issues and serve as a distraction that diverts our attention from the real questions we ought to be asking.

The bottom line of every political issue, and the place where every meaningful political discussion must begin, are the questions, “What is the revealed will of God in the matter at hand? How has His will been codified in the governing documents of our republic? And what are the just laws that have been made in pursuance of these?” The answer to these questions constitutes The Rule of Law, and we are not ruled by law until we are ruled by this hierarchy of authority. Continue reading “Syria, the U. S. Constitution, and the War Powers Resolution”

Honored by the SPLC

The organization that I chair, the Constitution Party of Washington, along with the party’s many other state affiliates, has been honored by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) with the title of “Extreme Antigovernment Group.” Please allow me to explain why this is an honor.

The Constitution Party is pro-civil government, pro-U. S. Constitution, and pro-rule of law. The Constitution Party understands that the rule of law emanates from the Creator who is the source of all authority; that authority has been delegated by God to man; that “we, the people,” have further delegated a portion of that authority to the institutions of civil government via the instruments of our state and federal constitutions. The only acts of governing that the Constitution Party opposes are those that violate the revealed will of the Creator or that violate the contract between we, the people, and the institutions of civil government.

Therefore, when the SPLC calls the Constitution Party “antigovernment,” it is by default saying that the only form of government that it views as legitimate is that which is unconstitutional, ungodly, or unbounded by the rule of law. Evidently, in the eyes of the SPLC, being “pro-government” means supporting administrations, bureaucracies, rules, and legislation that are outside of what the Creator, or we, the people, through our precious constitution, have authorized. Continue reading “Honored by the SPLC”