Redress of Grievances

A little-known part of the First Amendment to the US Constitution says:

…and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So that’s a right that the people have, and the government that follows the Constitution does not have the ability to take that right from the people. But do we truly have that right today? Does it include more than just the ability to complain?

For example, let’s take the recent actions of the TSA. They are openly sexually assaulting passengers who attempt to board a plane. Yes, I’m aware that they claim they’re not, but if I were to touch one of them in a private area without their permission, you can bet I’d be locked up for sexual assault in a minute. Aside from that, they are clearly and openly searching people. However, they clearly do NOT have “probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” (that would be the fourth amendment).

So, if, for the purposes of this discussion, we can agree that they are in violation of the fourth amendment, I have a question. I’m not proposing a discussion about the fourth amendment or the right to travel or anything like that. But I am saying that if there is indeed a violation here of the fourth amendment (and I believe there clearly is), do we, as citizens, have any option or redress?

First option: complain to supervisors. Sure, we already know that won’t work. The TSA has closed ranks. Supervisors at airports are told to search people. The head of Homeland Security says she’s going to search people and doesn’t care what anyone thinks. She says it’s her job, period. So there’s no option of redress there.

Second option: complain to local police about sexual assault. Good luck. Once again, the thin blue line will not be crossed. The local police will talk about “lack of jurisdiction” or some such thing. They’re not going to entertain thoughts of accepting reports of assault, much less get the TSA to stop.

At this point, the executive branch of the federal government has made their position clear: they’re going to continue to violate the fourth amendment, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

Next option: head to Congress. Is there anyone who actually believes “writing your congressman” actually works any more? Well, okay, in theory it does. So go ahead. Let’s say your Congressman (like mine) says, “I don’t care.” They’re not going to do anything. They’re going to continue fourth amendment violations because “it’s for the children.” Oh wait, I mean, “It’s for security.” Or “You don’t want terrorists to win, do you?” In any case, the legislative branch has now said they’re going with the fourth amendment violation.

What other options are available, now that the law-makers and the law-enforcers have now staked their claim that the fourth amendment simply does not apply?

The only other legal option is the judicial branch — who really just doesn’t like to get involved. After all, as an individual without a law degree, they won’t really listen to you. In other words, you must hire a lawyer if you want to talk to them. And you can’t file a case in a situation like this because no lawyer will take the case because the judge will likely just claim that you don’t have standing to file if you, personally, haven’t been sexually assaulted. And since the TSA has already said they’re not sexually assaulting you, and since the word of “law enforcement” is supreme in courts, the court will simply not get involved.

So now, we have all three branches of government in clear agreement: sexual assault, if done by someone with a badge, is legal. And the fourth amendment is null and void if the search is due to “national security.”

What right to seek redress do we have now? Have I used up my right, simply by having them listen to me? Should I be happy that I was able to write to my congressmen without being jailed for asking them a question? Or, to sum it up, the biggest question I have: If all three branches of the government agree the Constitution doesn’t apply, is there any possibility of redress?

I would suggest there is not. And in that case, which I truly believe we have today, the law is no longer supreme and instead, this country is ruled by men and not the law. This example shows that the Constitution is no longer supreme, as it can be overruled with a simple agreement between the legislative and executive branches. The will of the people, the will of the Constitution, and freedom are all subordinate to the will of those two branches.

So, we no longer are a Constitutional Republic. Is the United States a plutocracy or an oligarchy?

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

One Response to “Redress of Grievances”

  1. Blake says:

    First, you have to know how Obama views the Constitution- as a document that “impedes” the progress of his agenda, so he ignores (much like a spoiled child) the parts of the document he does not agree with, and just issues “Executive Orders”, thereby bypassing the “advise and consent” of the Congress.
    I knew that the Congress would make itself irrelevent, I just did not think they would do it so quickly, but like a cur dog that rolls over in surrender, Congress has done just that.