To SCOTUS, with love......

The Supreme Court of The United States of America is said to utilize the Federalist Papers in helping to determine the Original Intent of The Framers. With that in mind, I respectfully, submit the following;

To this reasoning it may perhaps be objected, that if any State should be disaffected to the authority of the Union, it could at any time obstruct the execution of its laws, and bring the matter to the same issue of force, with the necessity of which the opposite scheme is reproached.

The pausibility of this objection will vanish the moment we advert to the essential difference between a mere NON-COMPLIANCE and a DIRECT and ACTIVE RESISTANCE. If the interposition of the State legislatures be necessary to give effect to a measure of the Union, they have only NOT TO ACT, or TO ACT EVASIVELY, and the measure is defeated. This neglect of duty may be disguised under affected but unsubstantial provisions, so as not to appear, and of course not to excite any alarm in the people for the safety of the Constitution. The State leaders may even make a merit of their surreptitious invasions of it on the ground of some temporary convenience, exemption, or advantage. (i.e. - California, Hawaii, New Jersey, N.Y.C., Chicago, Mass., San Fransisco, and, ah yes,Washington, D.C. - ALL ARE CONTRARY TO THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND VOID! As indicated below by Mr. Hamilton).

But if the execution of the laws of the national government should not require the intervention of the State legislatures, if they were to pass into immediate operation upon the citizens themselves, the particular governments could not interrupt their progress without an open and violent exertion of an unconstitutional power. No omissions nor evasions would answer the end. They would be obliged to act, and in such a manner as would leave no doubt that they had encroached on the national rights. An experiment of this nature would always be hazardous in the face of a constitution in any degree competent to its own defense, and of a people enlightened enough to distinguish between a legal exercise and an illegal usurpation of authority. The success of it would require not merely a factious majority in the legislature, but the concurrence of the courts of justice and of the body of the people. If the judges were not embarked in a conspiracy with the legislature, they would pronounce the resolutions of such a majority to be contrary to the supreme law of the land, unconstitutional, and void. If the people were not tainted with the spirit of their State representatives, they, as the natural guardians of the Constitution, would throw their weight into the national scale and give it a decided preponderancy in the contest. Attempts of this kind would not often be made with levity or rashness, because they could seldom be made without danger to the authors, unless in cases of a tyrannical exercise of the federal authority.

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist #16

Excuse me, but, is this not THE SAME ALEXANDER HAMILTON which STATED the following?;

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.
- Alexander Hamilton

And if that illustration isn't enough for you, than perhaps another comment, from an author of The Federalist Papers, will STRIKE THE POINT HOME;

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of other countries, whose leaders are afraid to trust them with arms."
- James Madison

Of particular interest is the use of the word 'CONSPIRACY' by Mr. Hamilton. In his description of Judges who appear to be in league with the corrupt Legislature.

If further evidence of The Original Intent of The Framers is desired - I shall be more than happy to OBLIGE.

What say you - S.C.O.T.U.S.?

WHY are YOU allowing ILLEGAL USURPATIONS on OUR GOD GIVEN and CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS?
It is PLAIN, for ALL to see, that YOU must be part of THE CONSPIRACY!
As the NATURAL GUARDIANS of The CONSTITUTION - WE ARE ENTITLED.....

Give US an accounting of yourselves!