Sei sulla pagina 1di 8

CASE AGAINST VIRGINIA GOVERNMENT TYRANNY

(UPDATED VERSION 01.04.20)

The Virginia Oath of Public Office reads as follows;

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the
Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the
duties incumbent upon me as (office held) according to the best of my ability, (so help me God).”

The U.S. Constitution – Amendment II reads – “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security
of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Under U.S. Constitutional Law, “Militia” is the body of Citizenry at large; to “keep” is to own; and to
“bear” is to carry, without any restrictions whatsoever.

The Virginia Constitution reads in part as follows;

Article I. Bill of Rights - Section 1. Equality and rights of men

“That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which,
when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity;
namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and
pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”

Article I. Bill of Rights - Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power

“That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper,
natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall
not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and
that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”

As a result, the introduction and clear intent of Virginia HR 4021 and SB 4024, as supported by the newly
elected Governor of Virginia and the newly elected Democrat controlled Virginia legislature, represent a
clear and present danger to the Rights of every legal Citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Due to
the current practice of using events like this to set so-called “legal precedence” across the entire country
over night, this State matter in the Commonwealth of Virginia is of utmost interest nationally.

The actions taken by Governor Ralph Shearer Northam and the Democrat controlled legislature under
Virginia HR 4021 and SB 4024 also constitute the following violations by the elected officials identified
below;

(1) A direct violation of the 2nd Amendment in the Unites States Constitution & Bill of Rights;
(2) A direct violation of the Virginia Constitution;
(3) A direct violation of these individuals Oath of Office;
(4) A direct violation of the Constitutionally Protected Civil and Natural Rights of every legal Citizen
of the Commonwealth of Virginia;

HB 4021 Assault firearms, certain firearm magazines, trigger activators, & silencers; prohibiting
sale, etc.

HOUSE PATRONS (co-sponsors)

• Mark H. Levine (chief patron)


• Jennifer Carroll Foy (chief co-patron)
• Sam Rasoul (chief co-patron)
• Cheryl B. Turpin (chief co-patron)
• Hala S. Ayala
• John J. Bell
• Jeffrey M. Bourne
• Betsy B. Carr
• Eileen Filler-Corn
• C.E. Cliff Hayes, Jr.
• Charniele L. Herring
• Patrick A. Hope
• Kaye Kory
• Paul E. Krizek
• Alfonso H. Lopez
• Michael P. Mullin
• Kathleen Murphy
• Kenneth R. Plum
• Debra H. Rodman
• Ibraheem S. Samirah
• Mark D. Sickles
• Richard C. "Rip" Sullivan, Jr.
• Kathy K.L. Tran
• Jeion A. Ward

SB 4024 Assault firearms, certain firearm magazines, trigger activators, & silencers; prohibiting
sale, etc.

SENATE PATRONS (co-sponsors)

• Adam P. Ebbin (chief patron)


• George L. Barker
• Jennifer B. Boysko
• R. Creigh Deeds
• John S. Edwards
• Barbara A. Favola
• Janet D. Howell
• Mamie E. Locke
• L. Louise Lucas
• David W. Marsden
• T. Montgomery "Monty" Mason
• Jennifer L. McClellan
• Jeremy S. McPike
• J. Chapman Petersen
• Richard L. Saslaw
• Lionell Spruill, Sr.
• Scott A. Surovell

PUBLIC NOTICE: The North American Law Center is currently working on the right NATIONAL strategy to
confront the infringement of Constitutionally Protected Rights by the recently elected Democrat
controlled government of Virginia.

WRITE: TheNorthAmericanLawCenter@gmail.com for additional information and to be added to the


TNALC mail list.

https://northamericanlawcenter.org/

12.30.19 UPDATES REGARDING PROPER SOLUTIONS BELOW


THE APPRORIATE RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENTAL
INFRINGEMENTS OF CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED NATURAL RIGHTS
(Researched and Issued by The North American Law Center based upon current events in the Commonwealth of Virginia)

FACTS CONCERNING THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS IN THE UNITED STATES

(1) The “inalienable Right” of every legal US Citizen to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms is not a
“constitutional right” or “civil right,” it is a Constitutionally Protected Natural Right of all free
people, specifically protected by the Charters of Freedom.
(2) The Charters of Freedom are the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the
U.S. Bill of Rights.
(3) The Declaration of Independence established what would soon become The United States of
America, as a free, independent sovereign nation, made up of Fifty independent sovereign
States. It establishes the grounds upon which our independence is declared and the
foundational “inalienable Rights” of all legal Citizens.
(4) The U.S. Constitution creates our form of Federal Government, of, by and for the People of the
United States, sets the duties and authorities granted to the Federal Government under specific
and enumerated limited powers, in accordance with all Fifty State members of the Union and
their State Constitutions.
(5) The U.S. Bill of Rights is NOT an enumeration of the Rights of the People. The Bill of Rights,
including the Second Amendment, is an enumeration of additional conditions and prohibitions
preventing the Federal Government from ever infringing upon the listed Natural Rights of the
People as set forth in the first Ten Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
(6) Therefore, the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is a specific protection of the
Natural Right of the People to keep (own) and bear (carry) arms, in defense of themselves, their
property and their freedom and liberty, as it pertains to limited Federal authority.
(7) The Charters of Freedom and State Constitutions define “militia” as the People (citizenry) at
large. Any armed force which is subordinate to a governmental body, is part of the standing
Armies, the Military. An armed body of the People, not subordinate to any governmental body,
is the “militia.”
(8) Amendment Ten in the U.S. Bill of Rights states that any power not granted to the Federal
government in the U.S. Constitution, remains a power of the States or People, respectively. Not
only is the Federal government not granted any power to regulate the Right to keep and bear
arms in the United States, the Second Amendment specifically prohibits the Federal government
from doing so.
(9) As a result, far left leaning politicians across the country are seeking to strip the People of their
Natural Right to keep and bear arms, at the State level.

A STATE ISSUE WITH NATIONAL IMPACT

The recently elected Democrat controlled government of the Commonwealth of Virginia is openly
threating to strip the Citizens of Virginia of their Constitutionally protected Natural Right to keep and
bear arms, via their pending legislation, Virginia HR 4021 and SB 4024, expected to be voted upon in
January 2020.

These actions by Governor Ralph Shearer Northam and the list of Democrat legislators listed above,
constitutes a direct violation of their Oaths of Office, the U.S. Constitution, The U.S. Bill of Rights and the
Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

REQUEST FOR IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY INJUNCTION

The Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Virginia must be immediately petitioned to issue an
emergency injunction, preventing the Governor and Legislature of Virginia from passing any laws that
violate the Natural Right of the People to keep and bear arms, in direct violation of the Virginia
Constitution and their Oaths of Office, in Virginia HR 4021 and SB 4024, or any similar proposals.

THE CONSTITUTION OF VIRGINIA

Article I – Section I protects the Natural Right of all Virginians to keep and bear arms, without any
restrictions whatsoever.

Article I – Section 13 identifies the body of the People at large, who are not subordinate to any
governmental body, as the constitutional “militia.”

Based upon numerous prior court rulings, the Virginia Supreme Court has the power, duty and
obligation to prevent the State government from committing unconstitutional acts by issuing an
immediate ORDER OF INJUNCTION placing a stay on the Virginia Governor and Legislature, preventing
them from taking any actions which are a direct violation of the Virginia and U.S. Constitutions.

VIRGINIA STATE REPUBLICANS

Although the Virginia State government is currently controlled by Democrats, there are many
Republican members of the Virginia government and they must take a firm public stand to protect the
People of Virginia from the current assault on their Natural Rights coming out of the Governors office
and Democrat members of the State legislature. They can and should do this immediately by filing for
immediate injunctive relief with the Virginia Supreme Court to prevent Democrats from ramming this
direct infringement through on a pure party line vote. Republican members MUST join the effort to
protect the Citizens of Virginia from the current assault by Virginia Democrats. VIRGINIA MEMBERS
CONTACT

VIRGINIA SHERIFFS

There is no need for any Sheriff to “deputize” Virginia citizens to protect the People’s Right to keep and
bear arms. In fact, such an action would be counter-productive to all efforts to protect the Rights of
Citizens at large.
It’s also not necessary and counter-productive to use County Resolutions in any attempt to create
“second amendment sanctuaries.” First, all of the United States is a Second Amendment Sanctuary,
including every county in Virginia. Secondly, County Resolutions do not enjoy any force of law, and even
a County Ordinance (law) would fall subordinate to the State and Federal Constitutions.

Instead, County Sheriff’s should simply band together with the Citizens of their community and file along
with State Republican Legislators, for an immediate Virginia Supreme Court injunction preventing
Virginia Democrats from taking any actions repugnant to and in direct violation of the State and Federal
Constitutions. CONTACT THE VIRGINIA SHERIFF’S ASSOCIATION

THE PEOPLE OF VIRGINIA AND BEYOND

Contrary to popular belief today, the Federal Government, your State Government, your Local
Governments, are NOT the defenders of freedom and liberty. The People at large are… The People are
also the final arbiters of what is or is not “constitutional,” not the courts.

Alone, individually, ill-advises, divided and disjointed, the People are powerless.

But united, properly informed, strategically organized, directly engaged and completely committed to
their worthy purpose, the People remain to the true POWER in Virginia, every State and these United
States. Work together, no matter which State you reside in and demand that your Republican
legislators, Governors and Sheriff’s stand with the People in the matter.

ADDITIONAL UPDATE: 01.04.20

The Supreme Court of Virginia will rule in favor of The People due to prior U.S. Supreme Court rulings in
JAIME CAETANO v. MASSACHUSETTS vacating previous unconstitutional rulings by THE SUPREME
JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI Decided March 21, 2016

1 Cite as: 577 U. S. ____ (2016) Per Curiam

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES


JAIME CAETANO v. MASSACHUSETTS
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
No. 14–10078. Decided March 21, 2016

PER CURIAM.
The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments
that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the
founding,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, 582 (2008), and that this “Second
Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 750
(2010). In this case, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts upheld a Massachusetts
law prohibiting the possession of stun guns after examining “whether a stun gun is the type
of weapon contemplated by Congress in 1789 as being protected by the Second Amendment.”
470 Mass. 774, 777, 26 N. E. 3d 688, 691 (2015).
The court offered three explanations to support its holding that the Second Amendment
does not extend to stun guns. First, the court explained that stun guns are not protected
because they “were not in common use at the time of the Second Amendment’s enactment.”
Id., at 781, 26 N. E. 3d, at 693. This is inconsistent with Heller’s clear statement that the
Second Amendment “extends . . . to . . . arms . . . that were not in existence at the time of the
founding.” 554 U. S., at 582.
The court next asked whether stun guns are “dangerous per se at common law and
unusual,” 470 Mass., at 781, 26
N. E. 3d, at 694, in an attempt to apply one “important limitation on the right to keep and
carry arms,” Heller, 554 U. S., at 627; see ibid. (referring to “the historical tradition of
prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and 2 CAETANO v. MASSACHUSETTS
Per Curiam

unusual weapons’”). In so doing, the court concluded that stun guns are “unusual” because
they are “a thoroughly modern invention.” 470 Mass., at 781, 26 N. E. 3d, at 693–694. By
equating “unusual” with “in common use at the time of the Second Amendment’s enactment,”
the court’s second explanation is the same as the first; it is inconsistent with Heller for the
same reason.
Finally, the court used “a contemporary lens” and found “nothing in the record to suggest
that [stun guns] are readily adaptable to use in the military.” 470 Mass., at 781, 26 N. E. 3d,
at 694. But Heller rejected the proposition “that only those weapons useful in warfare are
protected.” 554 U. S., at 624–625.
For these three reasons, the explanation the Massachusetts court offered for upholding the
law contradicts this Court’s precedent. Consequently, the petition for a writ of certiorari and
the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis are granted. The judgment of the Supreme
Judicial Court of Massachusetts is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings
not inconsistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.

TNALC.org is prepared to support these UNITED efforts by any means available. The information
provided herein pertains to the Commonwealth of Virginia. However, the Natural Rights and
Constitutional Protections apply to every State in the union.

Write The NorthAmericanLawCenter@gmail.com for additional information or assistance in your state.