Op-ed: 

The 'Constitution-Free' zone is anything but constitutional
By: Diane Sori

"When you go into business in this country today you do NOT give up your moral conscious."
- Part of the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby

Ending the biggest assault by any administration on religious freedom, 'We the People' won two battles yesterday as the Supreme Court ruled in favor of both Hobby Lobby and that caretakers do NOT have to join or pay unions so they can take care of loved ones at home.

Two battles won but there are so many more to go before our beloved America is set right again, and one battle that looms large as it affects our welfare system, our healthcare system, and our economy is our unsealed southern border situation... especially in Texas.
 

Texas has become hell...literally...as Obama sits back and smiles because for him everything is about votes...future Democratic votes. We all know this is his true motive as he does NOT give a damn about these people per se only about what they can do for the party. And he knows they're willing to sell their souls by way of their votes so as NOT to bite the hand that feeds them. But there are things kept hidden by this administration that concerns NOT only those crossing our borders but how their doing so affects each and every one of us.

First, what's happening now is that America is being assaulted by an influx of ILLEGAL criminals...YES criminals...crossing our southern border. Called 'undocumented immigrants' by the media these folks...even the children...do NOT deserve that moniker because they're criminals by their very act of crossing into our country without following our immigration laws...meaning they've broken our laws to get here. And if you break our laws you're a criminal...as the meaning of the word criminal is that you've done something ILLEGAL.

However, doing something ILLEGAL is NOT just a catch-phrase for those crossing our borders, it also applies to the questionable activities of the Obama administration...and questionable includes keeping from public knowledge ILLEGALITIES done in reference to those crossing ILLEGALLY.

 

Now here's something few are aware of although it was mentioned fleetingly some years back on FOX...something regarding the extent to which the Obama administration monitors, collects information about us, and trashes our Constitution. It seems in 2009, the DHS...which is charged with securing our nation’s borders... announced it would conduct a 'Civil Liberties Impact Assessment' of its in-place 'suspicionless' search-and-seizure policy...and what's in place encompasses the entirety of the United States. Claiming it was done in the name of national security...the DHS made-up what's called the 'border zone'...a zone that stretch 100-miles inland from every coast and from our northern and southern borders, including where U.S. land meets oceans in addition to recognized borders with Mexico and Canada. Legally, the 100-mile border zone is called the 'extended border' of the U.S., as defined by Title 8 of the Federal Code of Regulations that deals with "Aliens and Nationality."

There's also something called the 'functional equivalent border,' which encompasses areas around international airports within the interior region of the U.S. And this spreading into the interior is part of a broad expansion of border powers with the potential to affect the lives of we ordinary Americans who have NEVER left the country let alone tried to enter it. So with that the DHS has now set themselves above the Constitution and done so by making, setting, and enforcing their own rules.

And get this...within the border zone the DHS can search your electronic belongings for NO reason whatsoever...and NO reason whatsoever is buried within their own DHS regulations as long as three criteria are met: first, a person must have recently crossed a border meaning if they're already here they become exempt; second, an agent should know that the object of a search hasn’t changed; and third that 'reasonable suspicion' of a criminal activity must exist...yet ignoring that crossing the border ILLEGALLY is a criminal activity in and of itself.

Bottom line...as a result of the DHS created 100-mile border zone, there are now almost 200 million people living within this zone, including those in New York City, Houston, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia. In addition, the DHS made it so that they can ‘overrule’ the Fourth Amendment...which mandates that a search or seizure done by a government agent must be ‘reasonable’...NO matter that the courts have construed Fourth Amendment 'reasonableness' as requiring probable cause and a judicially granted warrant. And the DHS can now also ‘overrule’ the First and Second Amendments within that 100-mile border zone, initiating what amounts to a Constitutional crisis for the Supreme Court has recognized several exceptions to certain Constitutional amendments, one of which is the border search exception within said zone.

Oh really... 

 

Enter center stage the ubber liberal American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who surprise of all surprises honored the rule of the law...the law as laid down in the Constitution...saying that any regulation allowing customs and immigration agents to search electronic devices at America’s borders without 'just cause' was, is, and will always remain wrong. And least people forget, two years earlier the ACLU tried to warn us that the 100-mile border...dubbed by the DHS as a 'Constitution-Free' zone'...was going to be put in place. But did we listen...NO we did NOT as the media...except for the brief mention on FOX...hushed it up for obvious reasons.

And of course the DHS then countered the ACLU by saying that according to legal precedence... District Judge Edward Korman's upholding of the Obama administration policy granting officials the authority to search American's laptops and other electronics including cell phones...citing a controversial premise that makes citizens within 100 miles of the border eligible for a police check...basically meaning that the Fourth Amendment does not apply along the border zone. Saying that customs and immigration agents can “exercise long-standing constitutional and statutory authority permitting suspicionless and warrantless searches of merchandise at the border and its functional equivalent,” the DHS grossly overstepped their bounds as far as 'We the People' are concerned.

So as we come full circle at the borders...militia groups are now gathering at the border to do the job border agents can't do or simply won't do...can't do because they're overwhelmed by the numbers of people crossing the border...or won't do as they know they can't stop the influx of ILLEGALS entering our country because our president does NOTHING to stop them...instead encouraging more to come.

And as for the ILLEGALS...especially in regards to the children being shipped to areas within the 'Constitution-Free' zone...within the100-mile border zone...they cannot be touched...meaning they cannot be deported as this exception from searches and deportation was made part of the 'Immigration and Nationality Act.' So ILLEGALS get protection from being searched and/or deported but 'We the People' get NO such protection.

And so it seems U.S. laws are NOT in effect in the 'Constitution-Free' zone...NOT the First, Second, or Fourth Amendments. And with the Border Patrol NOT doing what they're supposed to do...what their job dictates they do...as in detect and prevent ILLEGAL aliens, terrorists, and terrorist weapons from entering the U.S., along with preventing ILLEGAL trafficking of people and contraband. But trafficking is exactly what the Obama administration does when shipping ILLEGAL children off to Arizona...and our border agents can't do a damn thing as they've been delegated to changing the diapers of these ILLEGAL criminal children swarming our borders.

So as more of our civil liberties erode away...especially if you live in a border state within the 100-mile zone...you have more to fear from your government than those entering our country ILLEGALLY...and sadly that's how it is in today's America.

Op-ed:
Leon vs. Pauley...our freedoms rest on the final outcome
By: Diane Sori

"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." - The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Well we all knew this was coming didn't we as yesterday U.S. District Judge William Pauley betrayed our Constitution by negating our right to privacy as per the Fourth Amendment.  And he did so with his ruling that the National Security Agency's (NSA) 'sticking their nose into our private business' phone-tracking program is indeed legal.

Negating the December 16th ruling that came down from U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon that stated the NSA's surveillance program is actually unconstitutional, Judge Pauley justified his ruling by stating that what the NSA is doing "represents the government's counter-punch" needed to eliminate al-Qaida's terror network by connecting fragmented and fleeting communications.

But didn't Obama say al-Qaeda is decimated and on the run...but I digress...

And so I say NO way to Pauley's ruling as all that needs to be done is to listen in on those of a 'certain' ethnicity and 'certain' religious persuasion...oh wait...that would be racial profiling wouldn't it...the chief Obama political correctness no-no. Better the NSA spy and invade the privacy of everyday innocent Americans than focus their attention on those they know damn well are the only ones they need to keep tabs on.

And so political correctness wins out yet again and 'We the People' lose as there goes our Fourth Amendment rights to privacy and to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Using the 'what if' argument instead of adhering to the Fourth Amendment's 'probable cause' wording in issuing his decision, Pauley dismissed a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of conservative legal activist Larry Klayman (who wanting to turn the case into a class action on behalf of all Americans) against both James Clapper, the director of the NSA, and against the Justice Department. In doing so, Judge Pauley claimed that if a phone data-collection system had been used back in 2001 it could have "helped investigators connect the dots before the attacks occurred" and possibly prevented them.

To which I say NO way as those determined to kill will always find a way to do so.

And this snooping...this out and out spying on innocent Americans just in case they might someday maybe get involved in criminal activity should be blatantly in-your-face unconstitutional to anyone who has even a moniker of understanding about our constitutionally given rights and protections.

Sadly, Judge Pauley just does NOT get it as he continued that the government learned from its previous mistakes and "adapted to confront a new enemy: a terror network capable of orchestrating attacks across the world" and that the bulk data-collection program (data mining) was part of that adjustment.

Pretty words that negate the very heart of the Fourth Amendment as it dismisses the underlying premise of privacy and unreasonable searches and seizures, thus allowing the Obama government in effect to initiate a police state...to be Big Brother...and to iron fist rule over us all.

And the problem here is that Judge Pauley's ruling should NEVER have happened but did because the previous ruling by Judge Leon (who was appointed to the bench by Republican George W. Bush in 2002) was issued as a preliminary injunction against the program, which is well and fine, but then Leon stayed his injunction “in light of the significant national security interests at stake in this case and the novelty of the constitutional issues,” which allowed for an appeal by the Justice Department, which they did post haste.

Judge Leon's ruling stated that the government "does not cite a single instance in which analysis of the NSA's bulk metadata collection actually stopped an imminent attack'' yet in (Clinton appointee) Pauley's ruling it states just the opposite.

“Surely, such a program infringes on ‘that degree of privacy’ that the founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment,” which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, Leon said while Pauley stated that 15 separate judges on the surveillance court have held on 35 occasions that the data collection program is legal. So the final ruling to reconcile the two opposing decisions according to the ACLU...who plans to appeal their case to the Second Circuit in Manhattan...could be reached by the U.S. Supreme Court.

And if it does go to the Supreme Court we are in serious trouble if Barack HUSSEIN Obama gets a chance to shift the now somewhat conservative leaning court...somewhat conservative because we cannot be sure which way Chief Justice John Roberts will rule...over to an outright liberal leaning court by his being able to nominate new leftist judges to the bench.

And if that's the case 'We the People' are screwed big time as lost on most of those currently sitting on the bench...and assuredly to be lost on any Obama nominees to the bench...is the fact that NO one should be able to read our letters, track our phone calls, or monitor our internet usage, except if there is an undeniable and reasonable suspicion that we have committed or are in the process of committing a crime...period.

And so as the Leon ruling vs. Pauley ruling works its way through the Appellate Court and maybe up to the Supreme Court, 'We the People' can only hope and pray that the right thing is done in the end and that the Constitution's words are honored...but I won't hold my breath that they are.