Happy Constitution Day! Enjoy the blessings of liberty! ❤️🇺🇸
A series of pics for the day. Debating:
Independence Hall. Philadelphia.
The rising sun chair Washington sat in to preside over the convention. You can see it in Independence Hall in Philadelphia.
George Washington. Father of our country. He gave up power after two terms, saying: “I did not defeat George III to become King George I.” George III in response said: “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”
Thomas Jefferson. He called the convention “an assembly of demi-gods.” He was serving at the time as our Ambassador to France.
James Madison. 4th US President. Called the “Father of the Constitution” for his significant role in the drafting of it & the Bill of Rights, & for promoting ratification of the Constitution by the states.
John Marshall. 4th Supreme Court Chief Justice. A Virginia delegate to the convention, he was also instrumental in having Virginia ratify the constitution.
Ben Franklin. The oldest delegate, he urged all to consider carefully others views. On the last day he was ill, but his speech was read including this line: “Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure, that it is not the best.”
Alexander Hamilton. A tireless advocate for the Constitution, he was a delegate from New York. He was a principal author of “The Federalist Papers,” a series of articles explaining the Constitution to the people & urging ratification.
Gouverneur Morris. An often overlooked Founder, he wrote the beautiful Preamble to the Constitution. His other stylist changes made the document readable & flowing.
These were just men w/flaws & failings. But they fought for & created a system in which people rule themselves instead of being ruled by a despot who can beggar or kill anyone. These men were geniuses & heros. W/o them, especially Washington only the Almighty knows where we’d be.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Now that we all know what DEI is, I want to talk to the Right of Center about reclaiming the correct meaning of “equity.”
Equity is a legal word. It is contrasted with “law” in legal understanding.
The English common law developed the concept of “equity” as a means of avoiding the harsh and unjust outcomes that a strict application of “the law” sometimes produces.
This would be stuff like a lease where a couple made all payments except the last one was one day late because the husband died & the widow could not access to their account for a few days and the landlord would foreclose on the entire property. Technically allowed; still BS.
Ruling impartially on a case is a judge’s official duty. Taking money to rule for one side is not. But notice that the judge doesn’t benefit from the ruling, but from the bribe. Same for public officials.
Similarly, where a public official does benefit directly and personally from their own official act, esp if that is not disclosed, we’ve deemed that a conflict of interest, which is also private conduct that invalidates the public act.
These private acts are entirely different from cases where a govt official receives no personal financial benefit but gets an indirect non-monetary benefit - popularity, future votes, legacy - and (like everyone else) may benefit from the substantive official act (eg tax cuts.)
The test for whether spoken words are free speech or not is called the Brandenburg test from a SCOTUS case in 1969. It is also called the "imminent lawless action" test. ONLY if the speech rises to that level does it fall outside of the protection of the First Amendment.
In essence the speech must be the kind that does or inexorably is known to lead to "imminent disorder." (This standard is from another SCOTUS case in 1973, Hess.)
This is a very high bar & effectively renders almost all speech that doesn't actually result in violence, protected.
The "speech" in Brandenburg took place at a KKK rally, disparaged Blacks & Jews, suggested "revengance" should be had against the Congress for "suppressing" whites, & explained there would be a "march on Congress" on July 4th of 400,000, followed by marches in FL & MS.
The US govt needs to & is going to spy on foreigners overseas & also here, in our security defense.
FISA or no FISA, that will happen.
The only questions are who “gate keeps” it & how & what the standards are & whether the standards differ inside the US.
There is no question in my mind, at all, that the federal govt has unlimited power to spy on foreigners overseas for our national security intelligence purposes.
None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
Domestic spying- of foreigners here & of US persons here & abroad- present different issues.
And there is an age old problem of whether/if/when/how information obtained from intelligence can be used in the criminal process.
These issues must be debated vigorously & our rights as US persons jealousy guarded.