ALERT: Rand Paul is being DETAINED at the Nashville Airport by the TSA

[MsDoodahs]

You guys are actually in agreement, I do believe.

Gunny is saying the SCOTUS is wrong (blatant Constitutional violation)

Eduardo is saying the same - AND that if you TRY to go by what the Constitution says, they'll nail you - because of what SCOTUS said, which was wrong (blatant Constitutional violation).

At least that is what I'm getting from you guys.

 

[LiveForHonortune]

In our form of government, SCOTUS does not have the authority to overrule the Constitution.

Doesn't stop them from trying. The Supreme Court may be the final word on things but that doesn't stop them from being WRONG.

I'm going to quote the passage one more time.

"They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same;and for ANY SPEECH OR DEBATE IN EITHER HOUSE, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."

Take that as you will but I would definitely consider suing the highest court in the land itself for this.

 

[eduardo89]

Our government does all kinds of unconstitutional things. Doesn't mean they are actually allowed to, they just do it. Wickard v Filburn was even more wrong than Plessy v Ferguson.

No one is arguing against that. But in practice the SCOTUS does have this power and does exercise this power. SCOTUS rulings, even if they violate the intent of the constitution, become law.

 

[LiveForHonortune]

Yup, that's the sad reality. Unless we have a SCOTUS that cares about original intent, or a POTUS who appoints those judges and 60 Senators who allow it to happen the Constitution's original intent is meaningless and to ignore this fact is akin to living in a fantasy land.

Nullification is the only path I see to changing this. Even if Ron becomes president, SCOTUS and the Senate won't budge.

We're not going to deny their ruling existed, just that they're wrong because they are.

 

[slamhead]

I'll settle this....

Everybody who agrees with eduardo pound your desk with your right fist.

Everybody who disagrees, pound your desk with your left fist.


There, now we should all feel better!

haha...I pounded both fists as the arguments are mute as Rand was never arrested....but perhaps his immunity protected him from being arrested. If it was you and I we would have been put on a no fly list and shuffled off to some indefinite detention facility.

 

[eduardo89]

You guys are actually in agreement, I do believe.

Gunny is saying the SCOTUS is wrong (blatant Constitutional violation)

Eduardo is saying the same - AND that if you TRY to go by what the Constitution says, they'll nail you - because of what SCOTUS said, which was wrong (blatant Constitutional violation).

At least that is what I'm getting from you guys.

Lol finally someone gets it! I think what they did to Rand is wrong, I think the TSA is unconstitutional, I think we have an out of control SCOTUS. Sadly, what SCOTUS says is the law of the land and I'd you go against them, even if they're wrong, you're screwed.

 

[eduardo89]

We're not going to deny their ruling existed, just that they're wrong because they are.

Ok, so we're on the same page then! They're rulings might be wrong, but they're the law until overturned.

That's why we need nullification!!!!!!!

 

[eduardo89]

haha...I pounded both fists as the arguments are mute as Rand was never arrested....but perhaps his immunity protected him from being arrested. If it was you and I we would have been put on a no fly list and shuffled off to some indefinite detention facility.

Tried to +rep you but stupid iPhone sent it before I could finish typing out the message lol

F***ing iPhone did it to me again when I tried to rep Glen!

 

[GunnyFreedom]

No one is arguing against that. But in practice the SCOTUS does have this power and does exercise this power. SCOTUS rulings, even if they violate the intent of the constitution, become law.

A violation of the Constitution does not make the government right just because they do it though. In no way, shape, or form is any agent of the government authorized to detain a mamber of Congress on his way to session. They may do it ANYWAY, just like SCOTUS may abrogate the Constitution even though they are not authorized to do so. In this case TSA is breaking the law, and SCOTUS is breaking the law.

You have been phrasing this as though it was authorized for TSA to detain Rand since he was not actively in the chamber and voting at the time of detainment. I could not possibly disagree more vehemently. Government breaking the law is always illegal, it is never authorized, no matter WHO says "it's OK."

It's like saying that Obama assassinating American citizens is authorized because SCOTUS hasn't issued an injunction against it. That's just wrong. Nobody is authorized to abrogate the Constitution. Not Congress, not POTUS, not SCOTUS, and not some dingbat TSA agent on a power trip.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

No one is arguing against that. But in practice the SCOTUS does have this power and does exercise this power. SCOTUS rulings, even if they violate the intent of the constitution, become law.

Ok, so we're on the same page then! They're rulings might be wrong, but they're the law until overturned.

That's why we need nullification!!!!!!!

In our form of government, courts do not write law.

 

[eduardo89]

A violation of the Constitution does not make the government right just because they do it though. In no way, shape, or form is any agent of the government authorized to detain a mamber of Congress on his way to session. They may do it ANYWAY, just like SCOTUS may abrogate the Constitution even though they are not authorized to do so. In this case TSA is breaking the law, and SCOTUS is breaking the law.

You have been phrasing this as though it was authorized for TSA to detain Rand since he was not actively in the chamber and voting at the time of detainment. I could not possibly disagree more vehemently. Government breaking the law is always illegal, it is never authorized, no matter WHO says "it's OK."

It's like saying that Obama assassinating American citizens is authorized because SCOTUS hasn't issued an injunction against it. That's just wrong. Nobody is authorized to abrogate the Constitution. Not Congress, not POTUS, not SCOTUS, and not some dingbat TSA agent on a power trip.

I agree with everything you've said. Sadly it doesn't work like that in practice and as long as we have a POTUS, SCOTUS and congress who don't give a damn about the Constitution it is the "law" even if it is illegal.

 

[eduardo89]

In our form of government, courts do not write law.

No, but they interpret what the law means.

Actually in many cases the courts HAVE written the law.

And let's stop arguing, we both agree it's wrong, immoral, illegal and unconstitutional. Sadly it's the way things are right now and that needs to be changed.

 

[LiveForHonortune]

Look, beyond whether what they did was right or wrong (and it was definitely wrong), let's talk about how badly this reflects on the state of our nation.

This made headlines all around the world. We're already being laughed at by British people and even Chinese for being a police state.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

//

 

[MsDoodahs]

Look, beyond whether what they did was right or wrong (and it was definitely wrong), let's talk about how badly this reflects on the state of our nation.

This made headlines all around the world. We're already being laughed at by British people and even Chinese for being a police state.

How's tourism these days? TSA bullshit have any impact on it?

 

[slamhead]

The Gravel ruling was actually a good ruling. It had to do with the "Speech and debate clause". It upheld the protection of congressional aides in exercising of their duties but ruled against the aide as arranging the publishing of classified documents in a paper was not part of his legislative duty.

 

[eduardo89]

Look, beyond whether what they did was right or wrong (and it was definitely wrong), let's talk about how badly this reflects on the state of our nation.

This made headlines all around the world. We're already being laughed at by British people and even Chinese for being a police state.

Yeah it's sad the way things have worked out. The Constitution is a beautiful document, but it just goes to show that unless we have moral men leading and a people who stand up for every single one of their rights, every single time, no matter how small or inconsequential it may seem that gradually over time government erodes all your rights, one by one until you have nothing left.

 

[07041826]

haha...I pounded both fists as the arguments are mute as Rand was never arrested...

It's moot, not mute.

Moot

adjective

1. open to discussion or debate; debatable; doubtful: a moot point.
2. of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

The only enforcement the Constitution has every had is We the People in the voting booth. That's what we've forgotten. My goal is to put a Constitution into the hands of every single voter and convince them that we can save America together if they but simply read the document prior to voting and vote according to it.

 

[pen_thief]

It appears I'm late to this thread and it's derailed a bit but I'd just like to add:

I hope he made it as uncomfortable and awkward for the TSA as humanly possible
and I hope this opens up some people's eyes, as well!