Welcome to Unalienable Rights Foundation!

     Featured
· Home
· AvantGo
· Content
· Downloads
· Members_List
· Stories_Archive
· Surveys
· Top
· Topics
· Web_Links

     What Are/Is

The Unalienable Rights Foundation

Unalienable
V
Inalienable Rights

Dillon Rule

Citizens Guide - Impeachment


     Random Headlines

UARF FOIA Advisory Council
[ UARF FOIA Advisory Council ]

·Vetting Form to the Nothampton Commonwealth Attorney Failure!!!
·Is Nancy Bloom qualified to practice law?

     UARF FELLOWS

What is a UARF Fellow 


     CNN LAW
·Court upholds limits on Navy sonar training
·Slain wife accuses husband from the grave
·Prosecutors drop parent-killing case
·Priest accused of lying in mob investigation
·Inmate shot dead after brazen escape
·Juror: Judge and jury pressured me to convict
·Man convicted for Internet hoax death
·Zoloft killer's 30-year sentence appealed
·Girl who shielded mom is a hero at school
·Holloway disappearance hits cold case file

read more...

Contact Us

The Unalienable Rights Foundation

The Unalienable Rights Foundation

P.O. Box 65002
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23467-5002
Telephone 757-818-8003
Fax 757.282.2543
E-Mail UnalienableRights@uarf.us
We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Purpose of the Unalienable Rights Foundation

New Page 1 The Unalienable Rights Foundation

Purposes

of the

Unalienable Rights Foundation

A

Virginia Nonstock Corporation

This Foundation was founded in order to form a more perfect union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense of unalienable rights, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, promote freedom, property rights, civil rights, constitutional guaranteed rights in the Constitutions of the United States, the Commonwealth of Virginia and its sister states, The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies as approved in the CONGRESS of the United States of America on July 4, 1776 - this also being known and referred to as The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America, the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union as affirmed by the Congress of The United States of America on July 9th, 1778 and any and all Matters arising therefrom or in any way or manner related thereto: and  To Continue - MORE


Office of the General Counsel

Unalienable Rights Foundation Foundation Meet Staff of the General Counsel Office

Mouse Over and Click the Link Below

 To to Meet the General Counsel Staff

 

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

UARF Office of Civil Rights

UARF Office of Civil Rights

UARF Office of Civil Rights
Case Managers


Mouse Over and Click the Link Below

To Meet the Civil Rights Case Manager Staff


Antonin Scalia on Separation of Powers

Seperation of Powers Antonin Scalia

Separation
of Powers

Mouse Over And Click
To see the C.L.E. Materials

Presentation of A Summary
of The Right Hon. Justice
Antonin Scalia’s
Summer Course on the
Separation of Powers

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Instruction for the FOIA request you were sent

To see the instruction for replying to the FOIA request you received

To see the instruction for replying to the FOIA request you received from the Unalienable Rights Foundation

 

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

 Richard Nixon Pardon / In Part

General Counsel and Senior Law Fellows Richard Nixon Pardon

Richard Nixon Pardon / In Part

Gerald

Gerald R. Ford
61 - Proclamation 4311—Granting Pardon to Richard Nixon
September 8, 1974

 61 - Proclamation 4311—Granting Pardon to Richard Nixon
September 8, 1974

. . . [A]s a result of certain acts or omissions occurring before his resignation from the Office of President, Richard Nixon has become liable to possible indictment and trial for offenses against the United States. Whether or not he shall be so prosecuted depends on findings of the appropriate grand jury and on the discretion of the authorized prosecutor. Should an indictment ensue, the accused shall then be entitled to a fair trial by an impartial jury, as guaranteed to every individual by the Constitution.

It is believed that a trial of Richard Nixon, if it became necessary, could not fairly begin until a year or more has elapsed. In the meantime, the tranquility to which this nation has been restored by the events of recent weeks could be irreparably lost by the prospects of bringing to trial a former President of the United States. The prospects of such trial will cause prolonged and divisive debate over the propriety of exposing to further punishment and degradation a man who has already paid the unprecedented penalty of relinquishing the highest elective office of the United States.

Now, Therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.

In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this eighth day of September, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and seventy-four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and ninety-ninth.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=4696

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Saturday, January 14 @ 05:38:40 MST (20 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 UVA under Investigation by U.S. Dept. of Education's OCR

UnAlienable Rights >

Image result for u.s. department of education logo

 

The U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights [OCR] informed the Unalienable Rights Foundation [UARF] that it received a referral from the U.S. Justice Department [USJ] about UARF's complaint that the University of Virginia [UVA] discriminated against UARF's membership that are hearing impaired and will be investigating UVA.  

OCR says in its letter that UVA is a public entity, and receives Federal financial assistance from the Department,  and  that gives OCR jurisdiction over UVA pursuant to Section 504 and Title of the U. S. Code. because it does UVA.

Full details can be found in the OCR letter by clicking on this button.


 

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Saturday, January 07 @ 17:40:42 MST (100 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Donald Edwards Named as UARF's Secretary / Economic Development

Civil  Rights

Donald "Donnie" Edwards has been appointed as

UARF's

Secretary/ Economic Development

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Tuesday, December 20 @ 08:31:27 MST (59 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 A Conversation on Criminal Justice in the Commonwealth

Announcements
  Facebook Facebook Twitter

YOU'RE INVITED

A Conversation on Criminal Justice in the Commonwealth

Date: December 6, 2016

Time: 8:00 a.m.

Registration and breakfast begin at 7:30 a.m.

Where: Crowne Plaza Richmond Downtown, 555 East Canal Street, Richmond, VA 23219
Click here to RSVP

On December 6, one day after the Virginia State Crime Commission meets, a series of experts will convene in Richmond to address the future of criminal justice reform in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Stakeholders from a variety of viewpoints will gather to examine current criminal justice policies in Virginia. The goal is to identify opportunities to improve safety, lower costs, and examine policies that assist individuals with criminal records. Questions include: Under current law, how well is justice being served? Are there opportunities to improve the system for all?

Please join the Charles Koch Institute, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and a number of distinguished experts for panel discussions about these timely and relevant issues.

Program

8:00-9:00 a.m. Criminal Justice Reform in the Commonwealth: Navigating a Path Forward

9:15-10:15 a.m. Discovery Reform: A Necessary Demand for Justice?

10:30-11:30 a.m. Identifying Opportunities for Successful Re-Entry

Panelists to be announced.

Space is limited, so please RSVP as soon as possible.

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Tuesday, November 22 @ 15:35:55 MST (87 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Add your input For Virginia Judges to The Senate

Law and Order Recipes for Solutions New Page 1

Fix Virginia's Corrupt Legal System
Report Bad Judges To the Virginia Senate

Senate Courts of Justice
UPDATE Judicial Interviews Schedule

Meeting Date: December  2, 2016
Meeting Time: 09:00 AM
Location: House Room C, General Assembly Building
201 N. 9th Street, Richmond, VA 23219

Meeting Information: On Friday, December 2, 2016 @ 9 AM in House Room C, the Senate Courts of Justice Committee will meet jointly with the House Judicial Panel to interview judges.

See link for schedule.


   
Attachment Links:
     2016-12-02.pdf - http://studiesvirginiageneralassembly.s3.amazonaws.com/meeting_docs/documents/000/000/141/original/2016-12-02.pdf?1479760945
   
 
Link to Meeting: http://studies.virginiageneralassembly.gov/meetings/388

Link to Study: http://studies.virginiageneralassembly.gov/studies/304

You are currently subscribed to receive notifications for Senate Courts of Justice.
Please visit http://studies.virginiageneralassembly.gov/subscribers/new to unsubscribe.

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Tuesday, November 22 @ 05:07:47 MST (89 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Legislative Update 2-5-2016 Virginia General Assembly

Law and Order Recipes for Solutions

Legislative Update 2-5-2016

 

**********************************************************

 

I.  IN COMMITTEE MONDAY MORNING

CALLS NEEDED TODAY- SUPPORT

 

SB 543 Inverse condemnation proceeding; reimbursement of owner's costs

 

SB 543 was passed by for the day in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee meeting last Wednesday and is on the docket for the Senate Courts of Justice Committee on Monday, 2/8/16, (8:00 a.m.) in House Room B.  Please contact the Senators TODAY and ask them to vote YES on SB 543.  Attend the committee meeting, if possible.

 Senate Courts of Justice

 Sen. Mark D. Obenshain (R) 804-698-7526 district26@senate.virginia.gov (chairman)

Sen. A. Benton Chafin, Jr. (R) 804-698-7538 district75@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (D) 804-698-7525 district25@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. John S. Edwards (D) 804-698-7521 district21@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Thomas A. Garrett, Jr. (R) 804-698-7522 district22@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Janet D. Howell (D) 804-698-7532 district32@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. L. Louise Lucas (D) 804-698-7518 district18@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Ryan T. McDougle (R) 804-698-7504 district04@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. A. Donald McEachin (D) 804-698-7509 district09@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Thomas K. Norment, Jr. (R) 804-698-7503 district03@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Bryce E. Reeves (R) 804-698-7517 district17@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Richard L. Saslaw (D) 804-698-7535 district35@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. William M. Stanley, Jr. (R) 804-698-7520 district20@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Richard H. Stuart (R) 804-698-7528 district28@senate.virginia.gov

Sen. Glen H. Sturtevant, Jr. (R) 804-698-7510 district10@senate.virginia.gov

 

II.  UPDATE

 

SB 610 Recognition of out-of-state concealed handgun permits.

 

SB 610 passed the Senate (27-13) with a floor substitute made by Senator Reeves (chief patron).

 

YEAS--Barker, Black, Carrico, Chafin, Chase, Cosgrove, Deeds, DeSteph, Dunnavant, Edwards, Garrett, Hanger, Lewis, McDougle, Newman, Norment, Obenshain, Petersen, Reeves, Ruff, Saslaw, Stanley, Stuart, Sturtevant, Suetterlein, Vogel, Wagner--27.

 

NAYS--Alexander, Dance, Ebbin, Favola, Howell, Locke, Lucas, Marsden, McEachin, McPike, Miller, Surovell, Wexton--13.

 

RULE 36--0.

 

NOT VOTING--0.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HB 1096 Firearms; regulation by state entities.

 

HB 1163 Concealed handguns; recognition of out-of-state permits.

 

Both HB 1096 and HB 1163 were on the docket of the Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety this morning, Friday, 2/5/16.  We will let you know their progress in the next update.

 

 

**********************************************************

 

III.  WE SUPPORT THESE BILLS

 

•   Property Rights

 

SB 478 Eminent domain; reimbursement of costs

Introduced by: Mark D. Obenshain | all patrons 

 

Eminent domain; reimbursement of costs. Provides that costs and fees may be awarded in condemnation actions where the amount the owner is awarded at trial as compensation for the taking of or damage to his property is 20 percent or more greater than the amount of the condemnor's initial written offer. Under current law, such costs and fees may be awarded if the amount awarded as compensation at trial is 30 percent or more greater than the petitioner's final offer. The bill removes an exception for meeting the requirements for payment of costs and fees for condemnation actions involving easements valued at less than $10,000.

The bill also replaces the word "petitioner" with "condemnor" in the provision of the Code allowing the court to award costs and fees and allows the court to order the condemnor to pay to the owner reasonable fees and travel costs incurred by the owner for up to three experts, or as many as called by the condemnor, whichever is greater, who testified at trial.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

01/12/16  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 

SB 478 has been referred to the Senate Courts of Justice Committee which meets Mondays (8:00 a.m.) and Wednesdays (15 minutes after adjournment of the full Senate) in House Room B.  SB 478 is not on the docket for Monday, 2/8/16.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

SB 543 Inverse condemnation proceeding; reimbursement of owner's costs

Introduced by: Mark D. Obenshain | all patrons

 

Inverse condemnation proceeding; reimbursement of owner's costs. Directs the court to reimburse a plaintiff for the costs of an inverse condemnation proceeding for "damaging" property if a judgment is entered for the plaintiff. Under current law, the court is directed to award costs only for the "taking" of property. The change made in this bill corresponds with the language of amendments to Article 1, Section 11 of the Constitution of Virginia, which became effective on January 1, 2013

 

Status: (We support this bill)

01/13/16  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 

SB 543 was passed by for the day in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee meeting last Wednesday and is on the docket for the Senate Courts of Justice Committee on Monday, 2/8/16, (8:00 a.m.) in House Room B.  Please contact the Senators TODAY and ask them to vote YES on SB 543.  Attend the committee meeting, if possible.  See above for a listing of committee members.

 

•   Asset Forfeiture

 

SB 108 Forfeiture of property used in connection with the commission of crimes; finding of guilt required

Introduced by: J. Chapman Petersen | all patrons

 

Forfeiture of property used in connection with the commission of crimes; finding of guilt required. Requires that any action for the forfeiture of property used in connection with the commission of a crime be stayed until the person whose property is the subject of the forfeiture action has been found guilty of the crime authorizing the forfeiture, regardless of whether he has been sentenced. The bill provides that property may be forfeited even though no finding of guilt is made if (i) the forfeiture is ordered by the court pursuant to a plea agreement or (ii) the owner of the property has not submitted a written demand for the return of the property within one year from the date the property was seized.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

12/28/15  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

02/01/16  Senate: Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute (8-Y 7-N)

02/01/16  Senate: Rereferred to Finance

 

SB 108 passed the Senate Courts of Justice Committee (8-7) with a substitution.  It is now headed to the Senate Finance Committee which meets on Tuesdays and Wednesdays (9:00 a.m.) in Senate Room B.  SB 108 was not on the docket of the Finance Committee this week.  We are evaluating the substitution and will let you know if we still support it.

 

•   School Choice

 

HB 389 Parental Choice Education Savings Accounts established

Introduced by: Dave A. LaRock | all patrons

 

Parental Choice Education Savings Accounts established. Permits the parent of a public preschool, elementary, or secondary school student to apply to the school division in which the student resides for a one-year, renewable Parental Choice Education Savings Account that consists of an amount that is equivalent to 90 percent of all applicable annual Standards of Quality per pupil state funds appropriated for public school purposes and apportioned to the resident school division in which the student resides, including the per pupil share of state sales tax funding in basic aid and any state per pupil share of special education funding to which the student is eligible. The bill permits the parent to use the moneys in such account for certain education-related expenses of the student, including tuition, deposits, fees, and required textbooks at a private, sectarian, or nonsectarian elementary or secondary school or preschool that is located in the Commonwealth and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin. The bill also contains provisions relating to auditing, rescinding, and reviewing expenses made from such accounts.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

01/06/16  House: Referred to Committee on Education

01/15/16  House: Assigned to sub: Subcommittee Education Innovation

01/19/16  House: Subcommittee recommends reporting (5-Y 4-N)

01/19/16  House: Subcommittee recommends referring to Committee on Appropriations

01/20/16  House: Reported from Education (13-Y 9-N)

01/20/16  House: Referred to Committee on Appropriations

01/25/16  House: Assigned to sub: Elementary & Secondary Education

 

HB 389 has been assigned to the Elementary & Secondary Education subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee and meets on Tuesdays (10:00 a.m.) in the 9th Floor Appropriations Room.  Tuesday’s docket has not been posted, yet.

 

•   Firearm Related

 

HB 49 Right to keep & bear arms; codifies opinion of Supreme Court of U.S. in D.C. v. Heller

Introduced by: Mark L. Cole | all patrons

 

Right to keep and bear arms. Codifies the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that the right to keep and bear arms conferred by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Virginia is an individual right.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

11/25/15  House: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

02/04/16  House: Assigned to sub: Constitutional Law

 

HB 49 has been referred to the Constitutional Law Subcommittee of the House Courts of Justice Committee and meets on the call of the chair.  No docket has been posted, yet.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HB 83 Federal firearms laws; enforcement.

Introduced by: Robert G. Marshall | all patrons  

 

Federal firearms laws; enforcement. Provides that agencies and political subdivisions of the Commonwealth, and employees thereof, shall not knowingly aid any employee or entity of the federal government (i) in the enforcement of federal firearms laws that take effect on or after December 1, 2015, or (ii) in the conduct or enforcement of a criminal background check related to any intrastate sale, loan, gift, or other transfer of a firearm between citizens of the Commonwealth.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

12/10/15  House: Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety

01/15/16  House: Referred from Militia, Police and Public Safety by voice vote

01/15/16  House: Referred to Committee on Appropriations

 

HB 83 has been referred to the House Appropriations Committee which meets Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays (½ hour after the full House adjourns) in the 9th Floor Appropriations Room.  Friday’s meeting was canceled and Monday’s docket has not been posted, yet.  If HB 83 is on Monday’s docket, we will send out an additional update.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HB 132 Risk management plan; coverage for injury or death on state property, concealed handgun prohibition.

Introduced by: Robert G. Marshall | all patrons  

 

Risk management plan; coverage for injury or death on state property; concealed handgun prohibition. Provides that the risk management plan established by the Division of Risk Management shall include coverage for any claim made by or on behalf of a person possessing a valid concealed handgun permit who is injured or killed upon any buildings, grounds, or properties owned or leased by the Commonwealth as a result of the criminal act of a third party if the carrying of a concealed handgun on such buildings, grounds, or properties was prohibited by regulation. The bill also provides that, in addition to providing for the actual damages arising from the person's injury or death, the coverage shall include an additional amount of $350,000.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

12/18/15  House: Referred to Committee on General Laws

01/18/16  House: Assigned to sub: Subcommittee #4

 

HB 132 has been taken off today’s docket, 2/4/16.  Subcommittee #4 of the House General Laws Committee meets Thursdays (immediately after the full committee meeting), in House Room C.  Next Thursday’s docket has not been posted, yet.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HB 133 Risk management plan; coverage for injury/death on college property, concealed handgun prohibition.

Introduced by: Robert G. Marshall | all patrons

 

Risk management plan; coverage for injury or death on college property; concealed handgun prohibition. Provides that the risk management plan established by the Division of Risk Management shall include coverage for any claim made by or on behalf of a person possessing a valid concealed handgun permit who is injured or killed upon any buildings, grounds,or properties owned or leased by a public institution of higher education as a result of the criminal act of a third party if the carrying of a concealed handgun on such buildings, grounds, or properties was prohibited by regulation. The bill also provides that, in addition to providing for the actual damages arising from the person's injury or death, the coverage shall include an additional amount of $350,000.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

12/18/15  House: Referred to Committee on General Laws

01/18/16  House: Assigned to sub: Subcommittee #4

 

HB 133 has been taken off today’s docket, 2/4/16.  Subcommittee #4 of the House General Laws Committee meets Thursdays (immediately after the full committee meeting), in House Room C.  Next Thursday’s docket has not been posted, yet.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HB 443 Carrying a concealed handgun; permit not required.

Introduced by: Jeffrey L. Campbell | all patrons  

 

Carrying a concealed handgun; exception. Allows any person who regardless of having met the demonstration of competence requirement is otherwise qualified to obtain a concealed handgun permit to carry a handgun concealed in any place where such person could openly carry a handgun.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

01/07/16  House: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 

HB 443 has been referred to the Constitutional Law Subcommittee of the House Courts of Justice Committee and meets on the call of the chair.  No docket has been posted, yet.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HB 1096 Firearms; regulation by state entities.

Introduced by: Michael J. Webert | all patrons 

 

Regulation of firearms by state entities. Prohibits any state entity from adopting or enforcing any rule, regulation, policy, or administrative action governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying, storage, or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combinations thereof unless expressly authorized by statute. The bill invalidates any such rule, regulation, policy, or administrative action adopted by a state entity prior to July 1, 2016. The bill does not prohibit a law-enforcement officer from acting within the scope of his duties, nor does it apply to the Department of Corrections, Department of Juvenile Justice, Department of State Police, Virginia National Guard, Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services, or Department of Social Services. The bill allows entities to adopt or enforce rules or regulations necessary for compliance with the Fire Prevention Code or necessary for the operation of Reserve Officer Training Corps programs. The bill expressly authorizes the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries to create certain regulations governing the possession, carrying, transportation, and storage of firearms, ammunition, or components or combinations thereof.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

01/13/16  House: Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety

01/18/16  House: Assigned to sub: #1

01/21/16  House: Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s) (4-Y 1-N)

 

HB 1096 was on the docket of the Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety this morning, Friday, 2/5/16.  We will let you know its progress in the next update.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HB 1163 Concealed handguns; recognition of out-of-state permits.

Introduced by: Michael J. Webert | all patrons  

 

Recognition of out-of-state concealed handgun permits. Provides that a holder of a concealed handgun permit issued by any state who is at least 21 years of age is authorized to carry a concealed handgun in Virginia. The bill requires the Attorney General to enter into agreements for reciprocal recognition with other states that require an agreement to be in place before the state will recognize a Virginia concealed handgun permit as valid in the state. Current law recognizes concealed handgun permits issued by states that (i) provide a 24-hour-a-day means of verification of the validity of the permits issued in that state and (ii) have requirements and qualifications that are adequate to prevent possession of a permit by persons who would be denied a permit in Virginia.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

01/14/16  House: Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety

01/19/16  House: Assigned to sub: #1

01/21/16  House: Subcommittee recommends reporting (4-Y 1-N)

 

HB 1163 was on the docket of the Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety this morning, Friday, 2/5/16.  We will let you know its progress in the next update.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

SB 610 Recognition of out-of-state concealed handgun permits.

Introduced by: Bryce E. Reeves | Jill Holtzman Vogel | all patrons 

 

Recognition of out-of-state concealed handgun permits. Provides that a holder of a concealed handgun permit issued by any state who is at least 21 years of age is authorized to carry a concealed handgun in Virginia. The bill requires the Attorney General to enter into agreements for reciprocal recognition with other states that require an agreement to be in place before the state will recognize a Virginia concealed handgun permit as valid in the state. Current law recognizes concealed handgun permits issued by states that (i) provide a 24-hour-a-day means of verification of the validity of the permits issued in that state and (ii) have requirements and qualifications that are adequate to prevent possession of a permit by persons who would be denied a permit in Virginia.

 

Status: (We support this bill)

01/13/16  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

01/27/16  Senate: Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute (10-Y 3-N)

01/29/16  Senate: Constitutional reading dispensed (36-Y 0-N)

02/01/16  Senate: Passed by for the day

02/02/16  Senate: Passed by for the day

02/03/16  Senate: Passed by for the day

02/04/16  Senate: Read second time

02/04/16  Senate: Committee substitute reconsidered (39-Y 0-N)

02/04/16  Senate: Committee substitute rejected

02/04/16  Senate: Reading of substitute waived

02/04/16  Senate: Floor substitute printed to Web only (Reeves)

02/04/16  Senate: Substitute #1 by Senator Reeves withdrawn

02/04/16  Senate: Floor substitute printed (Reeves)

02/04/16  Senate: Reading of substitute waived

02/04/16  Senate: Substitute #2 by Senator Reeves agreed to

02/04/16  Senate: Engrossed by Senate - floor substitute

02/04/16  Senate: Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N)

Posted by editor on Friday, February 05 @ 08:43:31 MST (649 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)


 "offenses against the laws of nations"

Organic Documents

The meaning of "offenses against the laws of nations"
by Jon Roland, Constitution Society

Art. I Sec. 8 Cl. 10 of the Constitution for the United States delegates the
power to Congress to "define and punish ... Offenses against the Laws of
Nations". It is important to understand what is and is not included in the
term of art "laws of nations", and not confuse it with "international law".
They are not the same thing. The phrase "laws of nations" is a direct
translation of the Latin "jus gentium", which means the underlying
principles of right and justice among nations, and during the founding era
was not considered the same as the "laws", that is, the body of treaties and
conventions, between nations, the "jus inter gentes", which is
"international law". The distinction goes back to Roman Law.

Briefly, the Laws of Nations at the point of ratification in 1789 included
the following general elements, and prosecution of those who might violate
them:

(1) No attacks on foreign nations, their citizens, or shipping, without
either a declaration of war or letters of marque and reprisal.

(2) Honoring of the flag of truce, peace treaties, and boundary treaties.

(3) Protection of wrecked ships, their passengers and crew, and their cargo,
from depredation by those who might find them.

(4) Prosecution of piracy by whomever might be able to capture the pirates,
even if those making the capture or their nations had not been victims.

(5) Care and decent treatment of prisoners of war.

(6) Protection of foreign embassies, ambassadors, and diplomats, and of
foreign ships and their passengers, crew, and cargo while in domestic waters
or in port.

(7) Honoring of extradition treaties for criminals who committed crimes in a
nation with whom one has such a treaty who escape to one's territory or are
found on the high seas.

And, although it was not yet firmly established with all nations in 1789,

(8) Prohibition of enslavement of foreign nationals and international
trading in slaves.

No subsequent additions to the "laws of nations" could have the effect of
expanding the delegated powers under the Constitution. Ratification froze
those powers at the moment of ratification. Only the amendment procedures
provided under the Constitution can add to, subtract from, or modify them.

Some confusion on whether a treaty could confer additional powers on
government was introduced by the opinion in Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S.
416 (1920), which held that a migratory bird treaty with Canada enabled the
national government to regulate the protection and harvesting of migratory
birds within the United States, even though without the treaty the national
government would not have the power to do so. This contradicts the ancient
Law of Agency whereunder an agent, in this case federal officials, may not
acquire new powers from the exercise of a power, but only by delegation from
the principal. However, the opinion may also be read to say that it is only
state governments that are required by a treaty to exercise their already
delegated powers, and that federal courts have appellate jurisdiction over
cases of state compliance with federal treaties.

The case law was further muddied by the opinion in the case of United States
v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324 (1937), which held that executive agreements are
entitled to the same constitutional authority as treaties in the relation
between the states and the federal government, and that the supremacy clause
makes both treaties and executive agreements supreme over state power as to
the subjects covered by them. This decision has given rise to alarm by civil
libertarians, because there is no congressional approval required for
executive agreements, much less the two-thirds vote of the Senate required
for treaties, or the ratification by three-fourths of the states required
for constitutional amendments. By this reasoning, the president acting in
collusion with any foreign government could effectively eliminate states
except as voting districts.

Based on these precedents, then Secretary of State John Foster Dulles
promulgated what some call the "Dulles Doctrine" that treaties, executive
agreements, and votes in the United Nations, could effectively amend the
U.S. Constitution and expand the powers of the federal government without
limit.

However, this misunderstanding about whether the constitution could be
amended through the making of treaties was denied in the case of Reid v.
Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957):

"This court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the
constitution over a treaty" [Reid, at p. 17].

"... when a statute which is subsequent in time is inconsistent with a
treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null."
[Reid, supra, citing Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 238, at p. 267]

"No agreement with a foreign nation (no exec. orders, no Pres. directives,
no "accords" etc.) can confer power on Congress or any other branch of
government, which is free from the restraints of the constitution" [Reid,
supra].

Despite the decision in Reid v. Covert, however, the dominant faction in the
federal government continues to maintain the Dulles Doctrine, arguing that
Reid only applied to infringements on rights recognized in the Constitution,
and did not prevent expansion of federal powers through treaty, even though
one of the fundamental rights recognized in the Tenth Amendment was the
right not to have government exercise powers not delegated to it.

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Wednesday, January 27 @ 21:27:27 MST (639 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Virginia Law Makers At Play With Your Rights

Civil  Rights

.

.

Legislative Update 1-25-2016  

**********************************************************

 WE SUPPORT THESE BILLS

 

•   Property Rights

 SB 478 Eminent domain; reimbursement of costs

 Eminent domain; reimbursement of costs. Provides that costs and fees may be awarded in condemnation actions where the amount the owner is awarded at trial as compensation for the taking of or damage to his property is 20 percent or more greater than the amount of the condemnor's initial written offer. Under current law, such costs and fees may be awarded if the amount awarded as compensation at trial is 30 percent or more greater than the petitioner's final offer. The bill removes an exception for meeting the requirements for payment of costs and fees for condemnation actions involving easements valued at less than $10,000.

The bill also replaces the word "petitioner" with "condemnor" in the provision of the Code allowing the court to award costs and fees and allows the court to order the condemnor to pay to the owner reasonable fees and travel costs incurred by the owner for up to three experts, or as many as called by the condemnor, whichever is greater, who testified at trial.

 Status: (We support this bill)

01/12/16  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 The Senate Courts of Justice Committee meets on Mondays (8:00 a.m.) and Wednesdays (15 minutes after adjournment of full Senate) in Senate Room B.  SB 478 is not on the docket for Monday, 1/25/16.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 SB 543 Inverse condemnation proceeding; reimbursement of owner's costs

 Inverse condemnation proceeding; reimbursement of owner's costs. Directs the court to reimburse a plaintiff for the costs of an inverse condemnation proceeding for "damaging" property if a judgment is entered for the plaintiff. Under current law, the court is directed to award costs only for the "taking" of property. The change made in this bill corresponds with the language of amendments to Article 1, Section 11 of the Constitution of Virginia, which became effective on January 1, 2013

 Status: (We support this bill)

01/13/16  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 The Senate Courts of Justice Committee meets on Mondays (8:00 a.m.) and Wednesdays (15 minutes after adjournment of full Senate) in Senate Room B.  SB 543 is not on the docket for Monday, 1/25/16.

 •   Asset Forfeiture

 SB 108 Forfeiture of property used in connection with the commission of crimes; finding of guilt required

 Forfeiture of property used in connection with the commission of crimes; finding of guilt required. Requires that any action for the forfeiture of property used in connection with the commission of a crime be stayed until the person whose property is the subject of the forfeiture action has been found guilty of the crime authorizing the forfeiture, regardless of whether he has been sentenced. The bill provides that property may be forfeited even though no finding of guilt is made if (i) the forfeiture is ordered by the court pursuant to a plea agreement or (ii) the owner of the property has not submitted a written demand for the return of the property within one year from the date the property was seized.

Status: (We support this bill)

12/28/15  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 The Senate Courts of Justice Committee meets on Mondays (8:00 a.m.) and Wednesdays (15 minutes after adjournment of full Senate) in Senate Room B.  SB 108 is not on the docket for Monday, 1/25/16.

 •   School Choice

 HB 389 Parental Choice Education Savings Accounts established

 Parental Choice Education Savings Accounts established. Permits the parent of a public preschool, elementary, or secondary school student to apply to the school division in which the student resides for a one-year, renewable Parental Choice Education Savings Account that consists of an amount that is equivalent to 90 percent of all applicable annual Standards of Quality per pupil state funds appropriated for public school purposes and apportioned to the resident school division in which the student resides, including the per pupil share of state sales tax funding in basic aid and any state per pupil share of special education funding to which the student is eligible. The bill permits the parent to use the moneys in such account for certain education-related expenses of the student, including tuition, deposits, fees, and required textbooks at a private, sectarian, or nonsectarian elementary or secondary school or preschool that is located in the Commonwealth and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin. The bill also contains provisions relating to auditing, rescinding, and reviewing expenses made from such accounts.

 Status: (We support this bill)

01/06/16  House: Referred to Committee on Education

01/15/16  House: Assigned to sub: Subcommittee Education Innovation

01/19/16  House: Subcommittee recommends reporting (5-Y 4-N)

01/19/16  House: Subcommittee recommends referring to Committee on Appropriations

01/20/16  House: Reported from Education (13-Y 9-N)

01/20/16  House: Referred to Committee on Appropriations

 SB 389 has been referred to the House Appropriations Committee which meets Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays (½ hour after the full House adjourns) in the 9th Floor Appropriations Room.  SB 389 is not on the docket for Monday, 1/25/16.

 •   Firearm Related

 HB 49 Right to keep & bear arms; codifies opinion of Supreme Court of U.S. in D.C. v. Heller

 Right to keep and bear arms. Codifies the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that the right to keep and bear arms conferred by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Virginia is an individual right.

 Status: (We support this bill)

11/25/15  House: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 HB 49 has been referred to the House Courts of Justice Committee which meets Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays (½ hour after the full House adjourns) in House Room C.  The Monday (1/25/16) meeting has been canceled.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 HB 83 Federal firearms laws; enforcement.

 Federal firearms laws; enforcement. Provides that agencies and political subdivisions of the Commonwealth, and employees thereof, shall not knowingly aid any employee or entity of the federal government (i) in the enforcement of federal firearms laws that take effect on or after December 1, 2015, or (ii) in the conduct or enforcement of a criminal background check related to any intrastate sale, loan, gift, or other transfer of a firearm between citizens of the Commonwealth.

 Status: (We support this bill)

12/10/15  House: Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety

01/15/16  House: Referred from Militia, Police and Public Safety by voice vote

01/15/16  House: Referred to Committee on Appropriations

HB 83 has been referred to the House Appropriations Committee which meets Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays (½ hour after the full House adjourns) in the 9th Floor Appropriations Room.  HB 83 is not on the docket for Monday, 1/25/16.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 HB 132 Risk management plan; coverage for injury or death on state property, concealed handgun prohibition.

 Risk management plan; coverage for injury or death on state property; concealed handgun prohibition. Provides that the risk management plan established by the Division of Risk Management shall include coverage for any claim made by or on behalf of a person possessing a valid concealed handgun permit who is injured or killed upon any buildings, grounds, or properties owned or leased by the Commonwealth as a result of the criminal act of a third party if the carrying of a concealed handgun on such buildings, grounds, or properties was prohibited by regulation. The bill also provides that, in addition to providing for the actual damages arising from the person's injury or death, the coverage shall include an additional amount of $350,000.

 Status: (We support this bill)

12/18/15  House: Referred to Committee on General Laws

01/18/16  House: Assigned to sub: Subcommittee #4

 HB 132 has been assigned to Subcommittee # 4 of the General Laws Committee which meets on Thursdays (upon adjournment of the full committee) in House Room C.  The docket for Thursday, 1/28/16, has not been posted, yet.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 HB 133 Risk management plan; coverage for injury/death on college property, concealed handgun prohibition.

 Risk management plan; coverage for injury or death on college property; concealed handgun prohibition. Provides that the risk management plan established by the Division of Risk Management shall include coverage for any claim made by or on behalf of a person possessing a valid concealed handgun permit who is injured or killed upon any buildings, grounds,or properties owned or leased by a public institution of higher education as a result of the criminal act of a third party if the carrying of a concealed handgun on such buildings, grounds, or properties was prohibited by regulation. The bill also provides that, in addition to providing for the actual damages arising from the person's injury or death, the coverage shall include an additional amount of $350,000.

 Status: (We support this bill)

12/18/15  House: Referred to Committee on General Laws

01/18/16  House: Assigned to sub: Subcommittee #4

 HB 133 has been assigned to Subcommittee # 4 of the General Laws Committee which meets on Thursdays (upon adjournment of the full committee) in House Room C.  The docket for Thursday, 1/28/16, has not been posted, yet.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 HB 443 Carrying a concealed handgun; permit not required.

 Carrying a concealed handgun; exception. Allows any person who regardless of having met the demonstration of competence requirement is otherwise qualified to obtain a concealed handgun permit to carry a handgun concealed in any place where such person could openly carry a handgun.

 Status: (We support this bill)

01/07/16  House: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 HB 443 has been referred to the House Courts of Justice Committee which meets Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays (½ hour after the full House adjourns) in House Room C.  The Monday (1/25/16) meeting has been canceled.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 HB 1096 Firearms; regulation by state entities.

 Regulation of firearms by state entities. Prohibits any state entity from adopting or enforcing any rule, regulation, policy, or administrative action governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying, storage, or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combinations thereof unless expressly authorized by statute. The bill invalidates any such rule, regulation, policy, or administrative action adopted by a state entity prior to July 1, 2016. The bill does not prohibit a law-enforcement officer from acting within the scope of his duties, nor does it apply to the Department of Corrections, Department of Juvenile Justice, Department of State Police, Virginia National Guard, Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services, or Department of Social Services. The bill allows entities to adopt or enforce rules or regulations necessary for compliance with the Fire Prevention Code or necessary for the operation of Reserve Officer Training Corps programs. The bill expressly authorizes the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries to create certain regulations governing the possession, carrying, transportation, and storage of firearms, ammunition, or components or combinations thereof.

 Status: (We support this bill)

01/13/16  House: Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety

01/18/16  House: Assigned to sub: #1

01/21/16  House: Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s) (4-Y 1-N)

 HB 1096 has passed through Subcommittee #1 of the Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety and will now go to the full committee which meets on Fridays (9:00 a.m.) in House Room C.  The docket for Friday, 1/29/16, has not been posted, yet.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 HB 1163 Concealed handguns; recognition of out-of-state permits.

 Recognition of out-of-state concealed handgun permits. Provides that a holder of a concealed handgun permit issued by any state who is at least 21 years of age is authorized to carry a concealed handgun in Virginia. The bill requires the Attorney General to enter into agreements for reciprocal recognition with other states that require an agreement to be in place before the state will recognize a Virginia concealed handgun permit as valid in the state. Current law recognizes concealed handgun permits issued by states that (i) provide a 24-hour-a-day means of verification of the validity of the permits issued in that state and (ii) have requirements and qualifications that are adequate to prevent possession of a permit by persons who would be denied a permit in Virginia.

 Status: (We support this bill)

01/14/16  House: Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety

01/19/16  House: Assigned to sub: #1

01/21/16  House: Subcommittee recommends reporting (4-Y 1-N)

 HB 1163 is the companion bill to SB 610 (see below) and has passed through Subcommittee #1 of the House Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety.  It will now go to the full committee which meets on Fridays (9:00 a.m.) in House Room C.  The docket for Friday, 1/29/16, has not been posted, yet.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 SB 610 Recognition of out-of-state concealed handgun permits.

 Recognition of out-of-state concealed handgun permits. Provides that a holder of a concealed handgun permit issued by any state who is at least 21 years of age is authorized to carry a concealed handgun in Virginia. The bill requires the Attorney General to enter into agreements for reciprocal recognition with other states that require an agreement to be in place before the state will recognize a Virginia concealed handgun permit as valid in the state. Current law recognizes concealed handgun permits issued by states that (i) provide a 24-hour-a-day means of verification of the validity of the permits issued in that state and (ii) have requirements and qualifications that are adequate to prevent possession of a permit by persons who would be denied a permit in Virginia.

 Status: (We support this bill)

01/13/16  Senate: Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice

 SB 610 is the companion bill to HB 1163 (see above) and has been referred to the Senate Courts of Justice Committee.  This committee meets on Mondays (8:00 a.m.) and Wednesdays (15 minutes after adjournment of full Senate) in Senate Room B.  SB 610 is not on the docket for Monday, 1/25/16.

 

 

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Tuesday, January 26 @ 05:46:27 MST (1296 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Accomack County Circuit Court Missing Index and Records

UARF Civil Rights Case Management

Accomack County Circuit Court Clerk 

Not Indexing or filing Records Sent to the Court 

By The Virginia Marine Resources Commission [VMRC]

As a result of a Freedom of Information request [01/12/2016] by UARF's Vice President of Research, Doug Buckley to Samuel H. Cooper, Jr.,   Clerk of the Court and an examination of the files of the Court by Buckley it was discovered that the Court is not properly filing and indexing its records as required by the Virginia Code.  Buckley reports that he, Mike Clair/Chairman of the Virginia Marine Foundation's Virginia Marine Resources Advisory Committee  and court personnel found the records in file cabinets that are unlabeled, and that the court staff was unaware that the records were ever received by the court. 

UARF's President reported to the Foundation's  executive board that due to the lack of record keeping and indexing  by the Circuit Court the Foundation is not able to determine if VMRC has met its burden as set out in 
Virginia Code § 28.2-213. /  Distribution of new regulations. A copy of any regulation of general application adopted by the Commission shall be sent to the Registrar of Regulations, the clerks of the circuit courts of all counties and cities in Tidewater Virginia, and to all Commission officers.

Buckley explained that it is the belief of UARF if that VMRC is not in compliance with Virginia Code § 28.2-213.  any regulation passed by VMRC is a legal nullity and accordingly unenforceable.  Buckley further said that he is going to ask his General Assembly Delegate,  Robert Bloxom to make an inquiry to the Virginia Attorney General [AG]to get an opinion from the AG if a non delivered regulation as set out in Virginia Code § 28.2-213.  is enforceable and/r  a legal nullity.  In addition   he will ask the Delegate to ask the AG if the Clerk fails to index and file the regulation as set out in Virginia Code Sections 42.1-86 and 42.1-87 if the regulations are legal nullities.

What Buckley asked for:

Petitioner’s Exhibit 2

Schedule of Documents** / Public Records** that the FOIA Request Addresses

   

A. Index of Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) records  / filings for new regulations passed by the VMRC.

 

B. Virginia Marine Resources Commission regulations recorded with the Clerk of the Court of Accomack County between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2015.

 

C. Virginia Marine Resources Commission “Emergency “ regulations recorded with the Clerk of the Court of Accomack County between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2015.

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Tuesday, January 12 @ 19:52:31 MST (526 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 UARF's The Citizen Soldier White Paper/TOMB

Manual of the Constitution UARF's The Citizen Soldier

Get Your Free UARF White Paper/TOMB "The Citizen Soldier" [215 pages].

In medieval times it was a matter of law that common folk must purchase at their own expense and keep ready in their homes some basic weapons to serve and protect their king and state. The rulers expected the peasants to have acquired certain skills with their weapons prior to deployment, although they failed to provide any sort of funding for training.

The English Assize of Arms (1181), promulgated by Henry II, required that each man keep at his own expense in his home a weapon appropriate to his rank and position.1 The American use of militia was, in reality, a return to traditional practices of this earlier age. In medieval Europe the law defined a militia as "the whole body of freemen" between the ages of fifteen and forty years, who were required by law to keep weapons in defense of their nation.2 In the later Middle Ages the militia was the whole body of "citizens, burgesses, free tenants, villeins [serfs] and others from 15 to 60 years of age" who were obliged by the law to be armed.3

Trained Bands (or Trainbands) are found primarily in Elizabethan and Stuart England. The concept and term may be found as early as the reign of Alfred the Great (849-899). "For greater security, certain men in or near each settlement or City, who volunteered or were selected otherwise, were given, or agreed to procure, arms in advance of any emergency."4 These men became the mainstay of Cromwell's army during the Puritan Revolution and these units developed from the broader militia. The term is occasionally encountered referring to select militia in the American colonies, especially in New England.

Most European nations had abandoned the militia system by the sixteenth century.5 Americans chided the English for abandoning the militia system which had worked so well here. The militia, alone, had served as a check on the native aborigine in the colonial period of American history. For instances, when General Braddock was defeated near Pittsburgh, then Fort DuQuesne, the Virginia militia under Colonel George Washington's command stood against the French and Indians. The British army fled to the eastern seaboard. During the colonial period Americans came to trust the militia to a far greater extent than they trusted the regular royal army. The fancy uniforms and European battle formations may have served the British well in wars in the old world, but they were ill suited for backwoods America.

America's colonial citizen-soldier citizens soldier had their counterparts throughout history, as in ancient and medieval times when the peasants were conscripted to fight as foot soldiers. After the wars were over the peasants, too, returned to their fields. Tradesmen, farmers, men in all walks and vocations of life, had one thing in common: they stood as brothers in arms against the enemy as part of the citizen-soldiery.

The citizen-soldier stands in marked contrast to the professional soldier whose vocation is war. The citizen-soldier does not enter war for pay or booty. He goes to war only reluctantly, spurred on by notions of patriotism, nationalism and duty. He deplores war. He fights only as a last recourse when his nation is threatened and not in imperialistic adventures. There is no human institution any where more fundamental than the militia. As we shall show in this and the ensuing four volumes, excepting only religious dissenters, the true, traditional citizens owned firearms, less as a privilege than as a matter of duty. They came to equate firearms ownership with freedom. A free man is armed; a slave is dispossessed of his arms. No man can trust a government that seeks to disarm him. Those who claim the right to bear arms over and against tyrannical government stand arm in arm with his ancestors who refused to give up their arms at Lexington, Concord, and on a thousand other locations.

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Posted by editor on Tuesday, December 29 @ 08:07:44 MST (773 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

Tell Us About the Horrors of Your Divorce

the horrors you faced in family court

Tell us about the horrors you faced in family court.   Tell us about the problems you had with property settlement, child support, alimony   and custody issues as it related to your separation or divorce.  

A fit parent''s right to his children and a person''s right to private property are two of the oldest-recognized natural or unalienable rights.  These rights protect individuals from government intrusion in their most intimate relationships (parent-child) and possessions (home).  They preserve the sanctity of the family and the home.
 
Unfortunately, the American family and the American home are both under government assault.  When the United States Supreme Court announced its Kelo decision just a few years ago, the public suddenly realized government has almost unbridled power to take their homes.  The public did not realize government has even greater power to take their children.  Because the United States Supreme Court (or any federal court) rarely hears family law cases, these cases get very little public or national attention, such as the Kelo case received.  With very little public scrutiny, family courts have slowly chipped away at parental rights to the point where these once-sacred rights are now nothing more than a mere government-privilege.  Parents often see their children only as much as a judge will permit and make child-rearing decisions only to the extent a judge allows.
 
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution undoubtedly protect the rights to life, liberty, and property, including parental rights.  While all courts admit the Fourteenth Amendment protects parental rights, they typically follow this admission by dismantling or ignoring this right.  Each parent has equal rights to their child, yet courts routinely reduce one parent to a mere visitor in their child''s life.  Courts are now the largest cause of fatherlessness (and sometimes motherlessness) in America.
 
As it now stands, a parent''s right to his or her children (supposed "fundamental" or natural rights) are subject to the whim of the child''s other parent and the unfettered discretion of a single judge.  If one spouse chooses to exit the marriage, a judge then decides how much time each parent may see the child.  Instead of recognizing the equal rights of each parent, judges generally issue lopsided custody orders which allow the child to see one parent for only 20%-30% of the child''s life.  The typical every other weekend scenario removes the non-custodial parent from their child''s life for nearly 80% of the child''s life--all in the "best interests of the child."
 
Unbeknownst to many, the state has great incentive to separate a parent and child.  Under Title IV(D) of the Social Security Act, the state receives federal money based on the creation of a non-custodial parent and the number of child support dollars that flow through the state''s courts.  The longer the state keeps the child from one parent, the more child support the non-custodial parent must pay and thus the more federal money the state gets.
 
This situation is not only perverse and immoral but also unconstitutional.  Two, fit parents have equal rights to their children.  Most importantly, children have a fundamental right to a meaningful relationship with each parent.  Yet, family courts have converted children into a mere creature of the state which now decides the relationship the child may have with each parent, despite the fact that both parents may be fit and pose no threat of harm to the child. 
 
If you have experienced the horrors of family court, please contact us at general.counsel@uarf.us .  We are compiling data for research purposes and are looking into taking action to stop the family court''s impermissible intrusion into the American family, as well as the family courts'' destruction of the United States Constitution.

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

Mission Statement

Mission Statement

About The Unalienable Rights Foundation

The Unalienable Rights Foundation focuses on promoting good government practices: designating officials who sacrifice the common good to special interests. We will help Americans to shine a light on those who betray the public trust:

If a public official misuses his position to demand campaign contributions, the Foundation will find creative ways to seek civil remedies.
If a witness is threatened or punished because he/she reported official misconduct, the Foundation will fight back on behalf of the witness.
If a government agency withholds information to which the public is entitled, the Foundation will help enforce legal rules regarding disclosure.
If a group libels an honest public servant, the Foundation will help the victim defend his reputation.

The Foundation will seize opportunities like these, bringing high-impact public exposures of evil doers. The majority of our reports and stories will focus on real people and their stories about the lack of government integrity. Not only do these people need and deserve our support, their stories can serve as powerful tools to seize public attention and move public opinion.

The Foundation will work with the press, government investigators, and other public interest groups to make sure that these peoples'' stories are heard. In the process, Foundation will build a non-partisan investigative alliance that transcends specific issues. Our aim is to encourage officials to be open about their values and to act based upon their honest and best assessment of the public interest.

As we do this, over time Foundation will develop a network of public interest groups, sympathetic government investigators and media contacts ... a far-reaching, more mainstream version of the conservative league of individuals that has been so effective. We will work with that network to focus public attention on government integrity and to educate the public about dishonest or disingenuous government officials. If history is any indication, this type of network can have a substantial impact on public opinion.

We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.


     T R A N S L A T I O N S
Translations Language
Helpcom Spanish Spanish

Helpcom French

French
 Helpcom German German
Helpcom Italian Italian
We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.

     Categories Menu
There isn't content right now for this block.

     Big Story of Today
There isn't a Biggest Story for Today, yet.

     Old Articles
Sunday, October 11
· Kathleen McCarthy / Chair  Issues a stunning report of FOIA Council
Monday, October 05
· Meaning of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors"
Thursday, October 01
· Vetting Form to the Nothampton Commonwealth Attorney Failure!!!
Saturday, September 12
· HCN Serves the Virginia Beach Fire Dept.. FOIA
Tuesday, August 11
· The Unalienable Rights Foundation ~ Nominations of the Following Individuals
Tuesday, August 04
· Illegal separate emoluments or privileges for Judges and Lawyers
Monday, August 03
· Are Ivy League Law Schools Anti-Christian
Sunday, April 19
· Takings and Raisins / Horne v. U.S. Department of Agriculture
Friday, April 17
· HRTAC shutdown by FOIA and McCarthy
Wednesday, March 18
· UARF Offers FOIA Course
Friday, November 07
· UARF's Josh Thompson's Letter to Virginia Beach Mayor Sessoms, Do you want UARF
Monday, September 22
· James Madison: A Life Reconsidered
Friday, September 05
· President is [b]ound to resist force by force.
Friday, August 15
· Is Nancy Bloom qualified to practice law?
Thursday, August 07
· Josh Thompson / UARF Civil Rights Case Manager
Thursday, July 10
· COSTCO responds to UARF's letter
Wednesday, July 09
· The Unalienable Rights Foundation Admonishes COSETO
Tuesday, July 01
· 2014 Annual Supreme Court Round UP
Thursday, June 26
· Who in Northampton County Govt. Forged Public Records?
Tuesday, June 10
· Will Virginia's Unalienable Rights Foundation sue Northampton County
Friday, May 16
· The Clean Air Act Framework that Preserves ''States' Rights''
Wednesday, May 07
· Age of Enlightenment, History of liberalism and French Revolution
Wednesday, April 23
· What is a Public Record
Tuesday, April 22
· "Campaign Finance Reform" a discussion by George F. Will
Friday, April 11
· Executive Branch Review Conference ~ Federalist Society
· How to ''impeach'' the Northampton County Board of Supervisors
Thursday, April 03
· THE PERPETUATION OF RESIDENTIAL RACIAL SEGREGATION
Friday, March 28
· Second Annual Executive Branch Review Conference
Tuesday, March 25
· Antonin on the Separation of Powers
Saturday, March 22
· FTC amicus brief in Batman v. Facebook

Older Articles

     US Supreme Court Today
·

301 Moved Permanently


nginx
We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to
pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price. " target="new">301 Moved Permanently

read more...

     CNN
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·

read more...

     Is What I Got From UARF from UARF?
Is what you got really from UARF




Web site powered by Web Hosting USA

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © MM - MMXIII by the UnAlienable Rights Foundatation.

Google
WWW http://www.uarf.us

You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php or ultramode.txt
Copyright, MMVIII, Unalienabe Rights Foundation (UARF), All Rigths Reserved
Page Generation: 0.90 Seconds
We try to keep price lists up to date. Price list of our pharmacies are updated daily - go to pharmacy online : Announcements of new drugs. Shares. Best price.