Welcome to Unalienable Rights Foundation!

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

     What Are/Is

The Unalienable Rights Foundation

Inalienable Rights

Dillon Rule

Citizens Guide - Impeachment

     Random Headlines

Organic Documents
[ Organic Documents ]

·"offenses against the laws of nations"
·Executive Branch Review Conference ~ Federalist Society
·A Treatise of the Court of Star Chamber
·What is a Militia, as Penned to Paper in Virginia Law
· Thomas Jefferson On the Failure to Treat Law As A Science
·The Ancient ‘Science’ of law has been forgotten.
·The questions that beg answers from Virginia's Attorney General
·The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law,. . . sh
·The Scottish Declaration of Independence


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


     Instructions For Replying to Our FOIA


Instructions for Responding to
Our FOIA Request to You Click Below

Unalienable Rights Foundation: UnAlienable Rights

Search on This Topic:   
[ Go to Home | Select a New Topic ]

 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.


Posted by editor on Saturday, January 07 @ 17:40:42 MST (4281 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

  commitment to a government of laws

UnAlienable Rights our commitment to a government of laws

The ability to remove from office our highest official reflects the depth of our commitment to a government of laws, not men

[Alan Hirsch, Esq., A CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO IMPEACHMENT, 1998, Essential Books]

and the failure of the US House of Representatives says by their lack of action to curb the usurp

[usurp >verb 1 take (a position of power) illegally or by force. 2 take the place of (someone in power) illegally. -DERIVATIVES usurpation >noun usurper >noun. -ORIGIN Latin usurpare 'seize for use'.]

of power by Obama and his subordinates that the members of the House do not have a commitment to a government of laws but to that of men.

Posted by Editor on Tuesday, January 29 @ 07:08:03 MST (3311 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Washington On Religion - Original Intent

UnAlienable Rights Washington on Religion

George Washington on Religion:

President George Washington, in his 1776 farewell speech, issued one of the gravest warnings in American history:


Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.

He continued:

Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education …

reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Posted by david on Thursday, December 20 @ 06:36:25 MST (4393 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 'If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested' 4th Amd

UnAlienable Rights

Can sexual assault be made a condition of flying?

Is this a 4th amendment case?

How does a random search of a person’s person qualify under probable cause?

'If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested'

Flier becomes instant folk hero for refusing airport molestation.

"I don't understand how a sexual assault can be made a condition of my flying," said 31-year-old John Tyner to a pair of Transportation Security Administration officials insisting on giving him a "groin check" before boarding his plane.

Tyner’s question is a good one but there is a more basis question at hand. How does a random search of a person’s person qualify under probable cause?

What the 4th amendment says:

Security from Unwarrantable Search and Seizure. -- The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. U.S. Constitution U.S. Con. 4th Amd. (1791).

"The probable-cause standard is a "nontechnical conception that deals with the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians, act." Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366, 370 (2003) (internal quotation marks omitted).

"...absent specific facts... insufficient to establish probable cause . . . . Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366, 366 (2003).

Tyner was scheduled to fly this weekend out of San Diego International Airport when he was pulled from the security line at the metal detectors and told he would be either subjected to one of the TSA's full-body scanners – which reveal a virtually nude image of passengers – or a full-body "pat-down," including an inspection of his inner thigh.

Discomforted by the invasive procedures and the thought of a security officer touching his genitals, Tyner made a joke that has since made him an instant Internet folk hero:

"If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested."

Tyner's words have since resonated in dozens of online comments and thousands of views on YouTube, for the comment – and the controversial discussion that followed – was recorded by Tyner's cell phone.

Though the phone was with his belongings, and thus only caught audio of his confrontation with TSA officials, the camera's footage is posted on a blog Tyner created detailing the incident and viewable below, with his "touch my junk" comment and ensuing confrontation beginning at roughly the 3:45 mark:

For full article

To Send Us A Comment

Posted by david on Monday, November 15 @ 08:20:26 MST (3620 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)





 PAGE 11



by permission of the Author

DURING THE recent Nor’easter blackout, my neighbor’s house was burglarized when he left for an hour to buy ice. As we chatted about it, we both agreed that the crime had an extra sting because for most of us, a storm means a chance to bond and come together as neighbors. For an infinitesimal few of us, it’s a chance for money and crime. He mentioned that when he spoke with the police he asked, "If you catch the guys who did this, any chance I could get five minutes with them?"

Who wouldn’t have that natural desire for a front-row view of justice? A victim-criminal stare-down in a courtroom is appropriate and classically American. My neighbor deserves it with his burglar. And our country, especially New Yorkers, deserve it as we try terrorists.

When I first heard that the Guantanamo trials may take place in New York, I was encouraged by two things: 1) The trials would actually move forward and 2) those accused of starting this war would be brought before the very people they first attacked. Whether in a federal court or in a relocated tribunal, this is the opportunity our military tribunal teams have needed for years.

No trial attorney hears the phrase "speedy trial" without breaking a sweat. From the moment a defendant is in custody, the speedy trial clock starts, and judges don’t let it stop. It delivers a dose of reality to the defendants who try to grandstand, but more importantly, prosecutors use the loud ticking to demand the resources they need and to secure a place on priority lists with supporting agencies. At the end of the day, we have peace of mind about our courts because we know that even the worst defendant was given a fast, fair opportunity to defend before we locked the cell for good.

Generally, there is nothing inappropriate about military tribunals for wartime detainees. At the end of World War II, the Nuremberg trials were authorized by specific provisions in the instrument of surrender. Trials began within 90 days of V-J Day, and the top 22 Nazi criminals were convicted before Thanksgiving of 1946. The Tokyo trials were drafted separately from the document we signed on the USS Missouri, but more than 5,700 defendants were brought to trial in three years. The key was speedy trial. At Nuremberg, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson left the bench to lead the prosecution team, and on those trials he made the key imprint of American justice: Fair trials are expeditious trials.

Posted by MultumInParvo on Tuesday, January 12 @ 13:10:11 MST (3846 reads)
(Read More... | 5986 bytes more | Score: 0)

 Bill of Rights Celebrates its 217th Year

UnAlienable Rights Unalienable Rights Foundations Celebrates 217th birthdate of Bill of rights

Bill of Rights celebration Dec. 14 @ Town Center

VIRGINIA BEACH (December 5, 2008) - -  217th birthday party at Town Center in Virginia Beach to celebrate the Bill of Rights.

The public is invited to come to the public fountain area at Town Center @ 2 p.m., Sunday, December 14 and join the celebration of one of America's most important documents.

"The Bill of Rights was first introduced by James Madison to the First United States Congress in 1789 as a series of constitutional amendments, and came into effect on December 15, 1791, when they had been ratified by three-fourths of the States.

"The Bill of Rights limits the powers of the federal government of the United States, protecting the rights of all citizens, residents and visitors on United States territory.

Area Libertarians say, "We are encouraging students to attend and take part in this event that symbolizes what the protection of individual liberties really means and why we must protect them."

For more information contact Robert K. Dean:  Telephone 757-427-6606 or by email at: robertkdean@cox.net.

Posted by david on Friday, December 05 @ 13:25:47 MST (3307 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 1)

 Can Law Schools Have Part of the Federal Pie Without Obligations

UnAlienable Rights


Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights ("FAIR"), 04-

Oral argument date: Dec. 6, 2005

Under the Solomon Amendment, law schools that receive federal funding
must provide to military recruiters the same access to career placement
services that they provide to other employers. This requirement conflicts
with most law schools' policies of non- discrimination, which withhold
career placement services from employers who exclude employees on the
basis of race, gender, religion or sexual orientation.
The Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights ("FAIR") has
challenged the Solomon Amendment on two grounds. First, they argue
that the Amendment is an unconstitutional condition that infringes
their freedom of speech. Second, FAIR argues that law schools are
"expressive associations" whose right to free speech and dissemination
of a chosen message is impaired by the forced accommodation of military
recruiters on campus. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in ruling for
FAIR, held that the Solomon Amendment unconstitutionally impairs
expressive conduct and that the Government has not shown a compelling
interest that justifies denying this freedom. The case is significant
because it will determine whether, specifically, law schools are able
to bar military recruiters from campus without losing federal funding,
and, more broadly, whether certain associations may qualify for federal
funding but remain constitutionally protected from disseminating a
message with which they do not agree.

Posted by MultumInParvo on Thursday, October 13 @ 08:49:25 MST (3901 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)


UnAlienable RightsAnonymous writes "I guess the first step in self improvement is to figure out who you are and what you believe. Without knowing yourself how can you improve? So, in spite of living in a Bible-thumping, George W. Bush-loving area, I tend to be in the minority and walk against the grain. I have a very complicated view on organized religion. But, basically, I believe it does good in the sense of fellowship, support and peace it provides to the congregation. Once it gets into the "I'm right, you're wrong" area, I part ways. I have nothing against any religion, but I don't buy into any of them either. I'm completely satisfied with my own spirituality separate from the organized religions. And don't get me started on King Bush II.

I also seem to be in the minority in my area when it comes to my stand in gay rights. I'm not a homosexual myself, but I do believe they should have more rights than they get now (be able to marry, at the top of the list). This is the main reason I am very supportive in separating church and state (the Christian bias in the law seems to be the main reason given why homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry). We live in the "Land of the Free" yet we still ostracize certain groups of people. We do it with so many groups and it's really sad. I'll just add a note that it happened with slavery and we finally got past that (for the most part). I'll step away from this subject since I could go on and on.

I tend to develop my own beliefs and thoughts. I got this way from reading a lot and trying to understand others. The fact that I wasn't raised in a religious household or background allowed me a more open view. We are all human beings after all. No one better than the other. We're all fighting the same damn fight, but we're still holding and pushing each other back. I don't want to be part of that. There's already too much hate, prejudice and anger in the world.

I used to back down when people asked me what I believe or thought because I was always in the minority. I came from Eastern Kentucky (not necessarily the most open minded area) to the heart of Bush Country. I think I used to believe my opinion counted less than someone else's as if their beliefs were always one step ahead of mine. This is a dangerous way to think and I'm beginning to allow myself the knowledge my opinions and beliefs are just as valid as everyone else's. So, only in accepting and standing by what I believe will I actually be able to grow as a human being. Maybe this has been what has been holding me back for so long?

- Matthew David Ward is a 21-year-old college student who currently makes his home in Tennessee with his beloved border collie. He is an amateur poet and writer. He currently shares his opinions and thoughts via his webblog, The World As I See It (http://matthewward.blogspot.com)."

Posted by MultumInParvo on Friday, September 16 @ 21:06:59 MST (4042 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)




August 25, 2005
University of Missouri, Kansas City
Patrick A. Randolph, Jr*

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; DUE PROCESS; NOTICE: City's decision to eliminate curb cuts and deny access to restaurant's "drive through" lane is a taking of property and, even though it may be a valid police power act, may not occur without prior notice and hearing.  Consequently, actions so taken without hearing may be permanently enjoined.

Warren v. City of Athens, Ohio, 411 F. 3d 697 (6th Cir. 2005)

Plaintiffs had operated a Dairy Queen in for several decades at the same location.  In the 1990's, it became apparent that they would be unable to compete in the fast food business without a "drive through" lane.  But the only logical place for such an installation was in an area of their property that abutted a "dead end" street with eighteen homes.  (The Dairy Queen was on the corner, fronting on a four lane former highway.)

Posted by MultumInParvo on Saturday, August 27 @ 11:38:55 MST (4024 reads)
(Read More... | 9580 bytes more | Score: 0)

 Supreme's Bench Edicta in Kelo Violates CUS Article VI

UnAlienable Rights

Supremes’ Kelo Decision Violates Article VI of Constitution

5 Justices  issue edictas from the bench putting  forth in their ultra ego and persona as the highest magistrate, law - with out the invoking the authority of the Congress.

All across the nation as well as in Virginia private property is being taken from one private party and being given to another private party by the government under the color of authority of the government to use eminent domain for the purpose of the economic evolution.

It seems to this commentator that this practice is contrary to several principles of substantiated obligatory duties of government established from the times of the ancients to our present day. Further this commentator believes that under paragraph of the second of Article VI of the US Constitution [USC] all laws passed by any legislature or any holding of any court, that are holden under the Constitution, that conflicts with the laws of the ancients as put to treaty are unconstitutional.

We find in the ancient law [Incorporeal Hereditaments] the prescription that once the government has given a title to land [a fee] it can not give the same identical title, that has before been granted to one, to another; for that would prejudice the former grant. Yet we find government doing exactly that by using eminent domain.

The most recent infamous example of this is the matter recently decided by the US Supreme Court, Kelo v. New London. This case clearly shows us that the majority of the court are ignorant of the laws and issue edictas from the bench with out the invoking the authority of the Congress. The issuance of Edicas is the old practice of the Roman Emperors where the Emperor put forth as his ultra ego and persona as the highest magistrate, law - with out the invoking the authority of the senate.

Posted by MultumInParvo on Wednesday, June 29 @ 20:10:47 MST (2637 reads)
(Read More... | 9222 bytes more | Score: 0)

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

Helpcom French

 Helpcom German German
Helpcom Italian Italian

     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
Friday, June 24
Friday, June 03
· Corruption in Mandatory Homeowner Associations
Friday, May 27
· Michael Golden Republican Candidate for Virginia's House of Delegates Ask To Sup
Wednesday, May 25
· Libertarian Party of Oklahoma did not meet its burden
Thursday, May 19
· China's Citizens Have The Same Concerns About Their Unalienable Rights

     US Supreme Court Today

301 Moved Permanently

" target="new">301 Moved Permanently




     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.

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: 0.80 Seconds