The Courts Will Protect Your Liberties, Citizen

Tom Woods

"Well written, well researched, and the thesis put forth is well argued.... Woods has opened up an area of historical analysis that should invite further study."
-Journal of American History
"During these times that challenge our freedoms there is no one more qualified to make U.S. history relevant to the fight against big government than Thomas Woods."
-Barry Goldwater Jr.
Former Member of Congress
"I strongly recommend Woods's work."
-The Honorable Ron Paul,
U.S. House of Representatives
"Written with great clarity and fluency, making the complex philosophical and theological concepts approachable."
-Journal of American Studies
"A must-read."
-Barron's
"An excellent reading source for anyone interested in financial markets, and much more so for anyone interested in learning about capitalism without all the misinterpretations being thrown about in the financial media."
-Asia Times
"Provocative, well-written, and deserves to be read."
-Catholic Historical Review
"An engaging and important contribution to scholarship on the history of American Catholicism."
-Journal of the Historical Society
"Woods and [co-author Kevin] Gutzman appeal to both left and right in this constitutionalist jeremiad…. The authors' exegeses of the Constitution and court decisions, heavy on original intent arguments, are lucid and telling."
-Publishers Weekly
"A marvelous read. Every chapter taught me something new and unexpected."
-Tom Bethell, senior editor,
The American Spectator
"The hottest book today is Meltdown, by my friend Tom Woods."
-Judge Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst,
FOX News Channel
"Should be required reading."
-Economic Affairs (London)
"Woods, one of the best classical liberal [libertarian] scholars of his generation, has once more placed us in his debt with this lucid and tightly argued book."
-David Gordon, The Mises Review
"Tom Woods is one of my dearest allies in the struggle against wrong-headed and dangerous economic policy."
-Peter Schiff

That’s what nullification supporters are constantly told. Why, you have no right to resist orders from the federal government! And if there’s anything objectionable about them, the Supreme Court will intervene to protect you!

Unless it decides you lack “standing.” See “Justices Turn Back Challenge to Broader U.S. Eavesdropping.”

Anonymous

The Scotus is nothing but a joke. I personally believe that every ruling they’ve handed down since Marbury v. Madison should be nullified and thrown out.. including Marbury. They gave themselves an extra-constitutional power so their decisions should hold no merit.
Scott Lazarowitz

Perhaps the Supreme Bureaucrats would vote differently if they found out that their own plush private chambers were bugged. Oooh, you better not listen in on them and hear what they have to say — in PRIVATE! “Did you see what that ghastly Michelle was wearing today? Doh!” and “Hmmm. I’m glad that Mr. X paid me off so that I’d vote to approve …” Never mind.

This further trashing of Fourth Amendment protections, based on technical CRAP that means nothing, along with the turncoat Roberts calling a mandate a “tax” in order to rubber-stamp Premier Obama’s Unaffordable Careless Act, shows that these “Supremes” are totally useless to America — but they are useful to this corrupt government whose bureaucrats and criminals (sorry for the redundancy) want more and more power and control over the private lives of the entire population.

They are hardly “supreme,” not even mediocre. They are nothing but government apparatchiks who let crooks and tyrants commit crimes with impunity.
Dave in Ann Arbor

I’m curious. So if no one lacks “standing” to challenge the law, does that not imply that the law is deemed not to substantially affect them? And is this not just another way of saying the law does not apply to anyone? And might a reasonable conclusion then be that people are free to take suitable actions to avoid surveillance, up to and including destroying any government infrastructure in pursuance thereof, whenever and wherever found, since this law is apparently inapplicable to, well, everyone?
http://rosarynovice.stblogs.com/ Augustine

After all, the SCOTUS is known for supporting the humanity of blacks and the non-humanity of corporations… Wait, I may have the wires crossed, or rather, the justices do!
Pastor Ko-Rect

Case law is based on judges opinions. It is not based on actual logic. Nor does it have to be logical. That is why a Pharisee based legalistic system can never promote justice in the long term. That is why Jesus was against this type of system. That is why the church has been criticized for not calling out the beast.