Primary Foundational law from Law Libraries - Cornell, Harvard, Yale, and others - synopses..
FOUNDATIONAL SOCIAL ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - ORGANIC LAW
"At the foundation of every social order is a concept of law and government. For most of the history of the United States this foundation was the Bible - the Word of God - including both the old and new Testaments. Thus, the American view of law and government is founded on the Biblical view of law and government. This is explicitly made clear in the Declaration of Independence, which makes reference to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God and the Supreme Judge of the world.
The Declaration which the U.S. Code calls the 'organic law of the United States', asserts a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence. The Declaration goes on to say that 'all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that if government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish....and establish new.... for their safety and security'.
"The role of the Declaration of Independence in American law is often misconstrued. Some believe the Declaration is simply a statement of ideas that has no legal force whatsoever today. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Declaration has been repeatedly cited by the U.S. Supreme Court as part of the foundational law of the United States of America."
"The United States Code Annotated includes the Declaration of Independence under the heading 'The Organic Laws of the United States of America' along with the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, and the Northwest Ordinance. Enabling acts [to form state constitutions for all new states after the first 13] require states to adhere to the principles of the declaration"
Example: In the Enabling Act of June 16, 1906, Congress authorized Oklahoma territory to take steps to become a state. Section 3 provides that the Oklahoma Constitution 'shall not be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration of Independence (Christianity and the Constitution pp 360-361)
A copy of the Declaration of Independence on display in the Harvard Law School Library.
Thee Avalon Project at Yale Law School
Declaration of Independence : July 4, 1776
"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident:
That all men are created equal;
That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights;
That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;
That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;
That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world...."
Main article: Organic Act
The Organic Laws of the United States of America can be found in Volume One of the United States Code which contains the general and permanent laws of the United States. U.S. Code (2007) defines the organic laws of the United States of America to include the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777, the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, and the Constitution of September 17, 1787.
U.S. Supreme Court validation of Citizens Grand Jury
We the people have been providentially provided legal recourse to address the criminal conduct of persons themselves entrusted to dispense government and justice. In the Supreme Court case of
United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992), Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government "governed" and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights. Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to impanel their own grand juries and present "True Bills" of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a "buffer" the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.
112 S.Ct. 1735
504 U.S. 36
118 L.Ed.2d 352
UNITED STATES, Petitioner
John H. WILLIAMS, Jr.
Argued Jan. 22, 1992.
Decided May 4, 1992.
What power lies in a grand jury! A grand jury is a fourth branch of government that owes no accountability to any prosecuting attorney or to any branch of government, not even the courts. This power is upheld by Chief Justice Antonin Scalia, who ruled that a grand jury "is a constitutional fixture in its own right." S. v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992)
2013 – U.S. Supreme Court further explained citizen’s legal powers. – Scalia, writing for the court, again validates the above and expands on it affirming citizen rights to adjudicate, sentence, and carry out sentence on adjudicated corrupt government officials. This is applicable to seditious, subversive, and Treasonous acts as well as taking citizens rights by government against the foundational laws and documents of the United States. We, the people, have our power over bureaucracy specifically enumerated and affirmed by our highest court ! Now, all we have to do is act on that power.
A RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT INDEPENDENT CITIZENS GRAND JURIES
Whereas -The Founders of the United States of America understood the nature of all men, when given power was to use their positions in government to corruptly rule over their people and take the people’s liberty and freedom from them.
Whereas -The writers of the Declaration of Independence recognized that the people would need a legal method of removing corrupt officials from power and created that means in the foundational statement of that revered document, quote. “ We hold these truths self evident: that if government becomes destructive of these ends (the people’s God given rights) it is the right of the people to alter and/or abolish…”, and made that the primary law of the United States in the annotated legal code as Section one as organic or permanent unchangeable, undeniable federal law.
Whereas -The Constitution of the United States was and is a set of government rules to support this specific People’s Power, as can be seen in it’s beginning authority “We, the people of the United States..”, a statement that means nothing without the people’s power and authority stated specifically in the Declaration’s primary law statement and recognized as foundational law.
Whereas -The use of Independent Citizens Grand Juries have been a fixture in the government of the United States from the beginning and before to the 1600s and recognized in their specific authority and power to adjudicated corrupt officials as they saw fit and was thus codified in the 5th Amendment and affirmed multiple times by the United States Supreme Court.
Whereas as recent as 1991, and 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed that citizens have this right to form Independent Citizens Grand Juries, free of government control, designated a 4th branch of government, unaccountable to any other branch of government. (112 S.Ct. 1735 504 U.S. 36 118 L.Ed.2d 352 UNITED STATES, Petitioner v. John H. WILLIAMS, Jr.)
Whereas -The recent decades government denial of this legal method of holding our government officials accountable for their illegal actions, rulings, decrees, and programs have taken the freedoms and liberties of our citizens, reducing them to mere subjects and surfs of an increasingly corrupt and overbearing government.
Therefore –Therefore, we, the People of the United States recognize the validity of all Independent Citizens common law Grand Juries and will support their actions and defend them against all attempts by government officials to silence, coerce, attack, and/or disband them, and will support their actions to make corrupt government officials, policies, and programs accountable to the people as has been and is the People’s legal and irrevocable right to do. We also support U. S. federal law that makes any attempt by government officials to do the above a crime by them personally and subject to adjudication as well. In addition, it is also recognized that any refusal to indict a citizens common law grand jury indictment presented to government prosecutors is also an illegal and corrupt act and can by legally prosecuted by the people in their above rights.
The Grand Jury Belongs to The People–Antonin Scalia (1992)
United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992)
NEW YORK IS “GROUND ZERO” – Major grassroots movement in 48 States, Constituting Common Law Grand Juries. In a
stunning six to three, 1992 Decision that went unnoticed, until now, Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said:
In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992), that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government “governed” and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights, the acts of the Grand Jury is the consent of the people.
“The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually
assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It ” ‘is a constitutional fixture in its own
right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a
kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”. — Justice Antonin Scalia
“Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a
court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a
“buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” —
Justice Antonin Scalia
“The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it
clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists. The “common law” of the Fifth
Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.” — Justice Antonin Scalia
“Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional
relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in
the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together
and administering their oaths of office. The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident
both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.”
— Justice Antonin Scalia
“The grand jury ‘can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance
that it is not.’ It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating.
The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor
require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally
operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.” –
– Justice Antonin Scalia
“Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment’s constitutional guarantee presupposes
an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge” — Justice Antonin Scalia
“Given the grand jury’s operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have
been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over
the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury’s evidence-taking process, but we
have refused them all. “it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution” to permit an indictment
to be challenged “on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury.” — Justice
Justice William J. Brennan Jr., explained in U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (494 U.S. 247, 288, 1990): “The term ‘the people’ is better understood as a rhetorical counterpoint ‘to the government’… that rights that were reserved to ‘the people’ were to protect all those subject to ‘the government.’ … The Bill of Rights did not purport to ‘create’ rights. Rather, they designed the Bill of Rights to prohibit our government from infringing rights and liberties presumed to be pre-existing.”
In U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990), the Supreme Court stated: “‘The people’ protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community. … The Fourth Amendment’s drafting history shows that its purpose was to protect the people of the United States against arbitrary action by their own government.”
THE CENTER FOR GOVENMENT ACCOUNTABILITY