|
Thanks, Ernie, for covering story from Quartzsite
Letter Written by:
Mike Palmer
Date of Letter: 2012-02-18
Subject:
Gun Rights
Thank you Ernie for covering my story from Quartzsite, Arizona two weeks ago about "Michael's Law," a federal civil rights lawsuit over our Second Amendment rights. <a href="http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Media/Media-Files/129-0208123347-2012-02-08-ernie-am-FINAL.mp3" title="Hour 2">(Segment starts at 1 hour, 03 minutes.)</a>
I call it "Michael's Law" in honor of Michael Roth of Quartzsite. Readers here may remember Michael when <a href="www.freedomsphoenix.com/.../093954-2011-07-28-quartzite-az-escalation-in-arizona-firearms-confiscated.htm">his gun rights were revoked simply because he called someone a "turd."</a> Then it happened to me. <a href="www.freedomsphoenix.com/.../097193-2011-09-30-az-man-ordered-to-surrender-guns-just-for-blogging.htm">For blogging!</a> It could happen to YOU for blogging here if someone complains to a judge!
But aside from the obvious First Amendment issue of free speech, there is no provision in Arizona civil Injunction law allowing courts to take away your guns! The words "firearm" or "weapon" are not in the law. The Justices of the Arizona Supreme Court have made up a law - literally legislating from the bench - by enforcing an internal rule of theirs as law. Worse, because the Justices did it outside the Arizona constitution's Article III enumerated power clause, it's doubly unconstitutional!
Having fought this gun grab once in court and won, having publicly petitioned the Arizona Supreme court twice but lost, <a href="http://suingforjustice.blogspot.com"> now a case of first impression in federal court</a> to force the Justices to obey the constitution and the law. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcznFkhpOIY" title="youtube video on 'Michael's Law'">Here's a short 3 minute video about it.</a>
Unfortunately, Tom Horne, the attorney general for Arizona, is on the wrong side of this, defending the Justices in their unconstitutional action. He refuses to do the right thing. (I moved for his disqualification because I want to call him as an expert witness about our constitution and because he's violating his oath of office. That's also part of this case of first impression.) Maybe readers should call him, telling him to advise the Justices they're violating the law?
The case is currently in the Ninth Circuit on appeal after the second judge to hear the case dismissed it in a day, claiming judges have absolute immunity and can do whatever they want. But "absolute immunity corrupts absolutely," and I recently filed a show cause showing the law says the Justices can be sued for this.
It's your classic David v. Goliath battle, especially since I'm not a lawyer. So I'm thankful Ernie covered the story from his live remote from Quartzsite.
|
