WE THE PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW

Comment

Comment by carol ann parisi on May 1, 2022 at 5:25pm

First Inauguration: George Washington

 

On April 30, 1789, the very first United States Presidential Inauguration occurred. This event was significant for the precedents established and the role religion held throughout.

 

Newspapers outlined the first event of the Inauguration Day activities in New York City (which was then serving as the nation's capitol):

 

[O]n the morning of the day on which our illustrious President will be invested with his office, the bells will ring at nine o’clock, when the people may go up to the house of God and in a solemn manner commit the new government, with its important train of consequences, to the holy protection and blessing of the Most High.

George Washington, John Adams, members of Congress, and other officials made their way to Federal Hall where a large crowd awaited. Washington then took his oath of office on the balcony of Federal Hall. A witness recounted the feelings of the attendees at this historical occasion:

 

It would seem extraordinary, that the administration of an oath, a ceremony so very common and familiar, should in so great a degree excite the public curiosity. But the circumstances of his election—the …
… these conspired to render it one of the most august and interesting spectacle ever exhibited on this globe. It seemed, from the number of witnesses, to be a solemn appeal to Heaven and earth at once.

Next was Washington's Inaugural Address to both houses of Congress in the Senate Chamber. In this address, he noted:

 

it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being Who rules over the universe, Who presides in the councils of nations, and Whose providential aids can supply every human defect—that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes.

After Washington's address, the officials attended church services at St. Paul's Chapel and adjourned for the day. 

 

The first Inauguration 233 years ago is an example of the role religion had in the important events in American history!

 

Comment by carol ann parisi on May 7, 2020 at 5:19pm

The Fourth Amendment was intended to create a constitutional buffer between U.S. citizens and the intimidating power of law enforcement. It has three components. First, it establishes a privacy interest by recognizing the right of U.S. citizens to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.".

Comment by carol ann parisi on May 7, 2020 at 5:18pm

Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Constitutional Amendment

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. In addition, it sets requirements for issuing warrants: warrants must be issued by a judge or magistrate, justified by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

Comment by carol ann parisi on May 7, 2020 at 5:17pm

What are the rights protected by the Fourth Amendment?

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects personal privacy, and every citizen's right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion into their persons, homes, businesses, and property -- whether through police stops of citizens on the street, arrests, or searches of homes and businesses.

Comment by carol ann parisi on May 7, 2020 at 5:14pm

FISA Court Finds Massive Government Violations of the Fourth Amendment

In a 138-page ruling by U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), declassified by the U.S. government this week, it has been revealed that the FBI has violated the rights of millions of Americans. Boasberg made his ruling in October 2018, but his findings were only made public this week.

The FBI has been illegally searching through information that had been obtained via the mass surveillance program of the National Security Agency (NSA). In the past, those who have raised concerns over abuses of civil liberties by such data gathering by the NSA have been cast as alarmists, and assurances have been given that the mining by law-enforcement agencies of NSA data is only allowed after proper Fourth Amendment warrant procedures have been followed.

The Fourth Amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

Comment by carol ann parisi on April 30, 2020 at 1:19pm

The Third Amendment of the Constitution of the United States is one that arose directly out of the conflict with Britain that resulted in the American Revolution. Before the Colonies successfully gained their independence, Britain imposed the Quartering Act, which forced American families to take British soldiers into their homes and provide them with room and board.

The British imposed themselves on the private dwellings of families, and often took advantage and abused the extent of this imperialistic provision created by the British. This was evident specifically during the French and Indian War, when members of the Britain military would force families into providing them housing and would take quarters in private homes without authorization or permission granted from the owners. The Third Amendment would come into creation as a way to protect these circumstances from occurring again by prohibiting the practice under United States legislation.

The Third Amendment explicitly states, "No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." Arising from previous tensions created by the Quartering Act and citizens of the Thirteen Colonies, the Forefathers of the Constitution took it into consideration and barred the practice by law.

At the time, the illegal and forceful quartering of British soldiers was a form of oppression and tyranny by the British Empire, as was deemed an outrage by American citizens. It was even transcribed in the United States Declaration of Independence as one of the grievances against the King. They would view this as an invasion of privacy and trespassing on private property, which was considered unlawful and abusive in the eyes of the Colonialists.

However, it cannot be denied that the Third Amendment is one that has outlived its purpose, as far as its application in modern times is concerned. The inclusion of the Third Amendment is directly associated with the time period in which it was written and has not been applied or enforced simply because the necessity has never arisen since then.

The Third Amendment has little, if any, relevance or purpose today. However, in the early 1980s the Third Amendment was used in a court case regarding the housing of National Guard members that were employed during a strike by New York State correction officers. Many of the correction officers were evicted from their employee housing in order to accommodate the influx on the National Guard. The matter was brought to trial in the court case Engblom v. Carey, in which the courts deemed it that such action was protected by the Third Amendment because the National Guard is a military establishment and its members qualify as soldiers. This would be the first and last time the Third Amendment would be employed since the late 1700s.

Even though the Amendment can be considered obsolete, it still is important as a major piece of legislation that existed to oppose tyranny and unjust treatment of American citizens.

Comment by carol ann parisi on April 30, 2020 at 1:17pm

Third Amendment: The Quartering of Soldiers

 

What is the Third Amendment?

 

 

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

The Third Amendment Defined:

 

The Third Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution and the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights were proposed and sent to the states by the first session of the First Congress. They were later ratified on December 15, 1791. The Third Amendment was introduced on September 5, 1789.

The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification by three-fourths of the States on December 15, 1791.

Stipulations of the 3rd Amendment:

 

The Third Amendment prohibits, during times of peace, the quartering of soldiers on private property and in private homes without the consent of the owner. The Third Amendment makes the quartering of soldiers permissible only in times of conflict or war and then only according to the area’s particular laws. 

The Third Amendment is routinely regarded as one of the least cited sections of the United States Constitution. The reasoning behind this notion or lack of use stems from the obsolete nature of the passage—rarely in modern times are soldiers quartered in private homes. That being said, the Amendment is occasionally cited as a base for the right to privacy.

How was the 3rd Amendment Created?

The original constitution was met with skepticism due to the lack of civil liberties. In response, the bill of Rights was created to include the 3rd Amendment along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. Numerous revisions were drafted to better elucidate upon the distinction between times of war and times of peace and whether the executive or the legislative branch of government would possess the power to authorize quartering.

Court Cases tied into the 3rd Amendment

 

In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the court ruled that the framers of the Constitution intended to constrain executive power even during times of war. The court ruled that military powers of the executive branch were not meant to supersede representative government of internal affairs. 

Comment by carol ann parisi on December 2, 2012 at 10:57am

Comment by carol ann parisi on November 9, 2010 at 8:23am

SEAT KIRK NOW....

http://americansforprosperity.org/110810-spread-word-about-seatkirk...