COURT JUDGE IMPEACHMENT UNDERWAY IN MARYLAND
February 20, 2006
"[How] to check these unconstitutional invasions of rights by the Federal judiciary? Not by impeachment in the first instance, but by a strong protestation of both houses of Congress that such and such doctrines advanced by the Supreme Court are contrary to the Constitution; and if afterwards they relapse into the same heresies, impeach and set the whole adrift. For what was the government divided into three branches, but that each should watch over the others and oppose their usurpation's?" - Thomas Jefferson, 1821
The same applies to state judges who are not above the law nor should they strike down laws at their whim to support or promote their personal agendas. Freedom loving Americans have been pounding on elected public officials - especially the U.S. Congress - to remove bad judges from the bench. A bad judge is defined as those who make decisions that are clearly contrary to the U.S. Constitution (Kelo decision) and promote their toxic social agendas. Congress continues to flip off we the people as well as the majority of state legislators. However, there are a good number of legislators throughout the states who have the courage to stand up to Congress, the Cheney/Bush administration and judges who over step their authority.
I have been honored to know Delegate Don Dwyer who serves in the Maryland State Legislature (General Assembly). [Just as a little side note, I have been to the State House in Annapolis. It is truly a lovely building, rich with history and located a few blocks from the fabulous water front market place and a mile or so from the magnificent U.S. Naval Academy. If you are ever in the area, I encourage you to visit all three.] Don Dwyer is the classic example of true leadership and a fearless fighter for what is right. He is not afraid to stand up to those who promote the rancid sodomy agenda and those leading the relentless assault on the institution of marriage between a man and woman. The situation has so deteriorated in his state, Don has now taken the courageous steps to impeach a circuit court judge who has crossed the line and over stepped her authority.
The following is a press release dated January 30, 2006 which gives a comprehensive overview of the situation out in Maryland:
Decision Striking Down Maryland's Marriage Law Reveals Bias; Delegate Weighs Impeachment Charge Against Judge
"Annapolis, Md.- On January 20, 2006, Judge M. Brooke Murdock (circuit court of Baltimore) issued a decision that Maryland's marriage law of 1973 was unconstitutional on the basis of equal rights. Delegate Don Dwyer, who has spearheaded the effort to protect and preserve traditional marriage in the state of Maryland, believes the judge's decision is not only wrong, but that the judge has acted improperly in this case.
"Judge Murdock's decision only references one of the four defensive statements issued by the ACLU's attorney. In the event that Maryland's High Court should rule against the lower court decision-which was predicated on equal rights-then the ACLU would be left with three additional arguments to challenge this law in the Maryland court system," stated Dwyer. "This not only unduly ties up the courts and frivolously expends taxpayer dollars, but demonstrates a clear bias on the part of Judge Murdock.
"This decision is contrary to the laws of nature, which are explicitly defined in our Declaration and are the foundational cornerstone of American law and jurisprudence," Delegate Dwyer continued. "For this reason, I'm seriously considering bringing a impeachment charge against Judge M. Brooke Murdock for a violation of her oath to protect and defend the state constitution and the laws of Maryland as clearly outlined under Article 5, Section A of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, which states: 'Inhabitants of Maryland are entitled to English Common Law as it existed on July 4, 1776.' English Common Law clearly recognized marriage as between one man and one woman. Any opinion of the court that is contrary to this belief only reveals that the judge is either incompetent or an activist, or both."
"Delegate Dwyer's efforts to defend traditional marriage in the state of Maryland include filing motions to intervene in the ACLU case; providing the attorney general's office with material support to defend Maryland's law; and submitting a constitutional amendment to define marriage. Delegate Dwyer has faced unrelenting partisan opposition to his work on the marriage amendment, especially from the speaker of the house, who has refused to recognize Dwyer on the floor and who has actually amended the House rules to prevent presentation of the amendment.
"Other tactics by Democrats, desperate to avoid the constitutional amendment going to the ballot in November 2006, include legislation to preclude Maryland's highest courts from deciding on the ACLU case until after the election."
Click here to read the timeline on Don's bill HR 48. Same old politics, same old chicanery by elected public officials who talk out both sides of their mouths. According to a press release issued January 2, 2006, the speaker of the assembly demonstrated he's just another gutless individual who doesn't have the courage to stand up for his convictions, so instead, he plays political games:
Speaker Busch Hides from Gay Marriage Vote
"Delegate Don Dwyer, Jr. (R) 31st District has collected enough signatures, 47, on his petition to bring Maryland's Marriage Protection Act (HB 48) to the House floor for a full vote. Fifteen minutes before the morning session, his office called various news media outlets to record the historic event. Many responded immediately.
"Upon noticing the television cameras and reporters in the House chambers, Speaker Mike Busch (D) 30th District, in an unprecedented move, decided not to conduct session. After a quorum of delegates had entered the room, Majority Leader Kumar Barve quickly moved to recess and session was over. Speaker Busch left the chambers right away. The procedure was completely disregarded. It was unlike anything the delegates had seen before.
"Delegate Dwyer, afterwards, invited reporters to the Judiciary Committee voting session at 1pm because the rumor was that the bill would be killed in committee today so as to avoid it being petitioned to the floor in tomorrow's morning session. Again, upon noticing the presence of news media, Chairman Vallario postponed voting on HB 48 until the end of the voting session. His motive was clear: most of the reporters have deadlines that would preclude them from waiting for a vote all afternoon.
"The Democratic Party is at it again. They're doing everything they can to prevent the people from defining marriage for themselves," Delegate Dwyer said.
The voters of Busch's district need to throw his backside out of office come November. Of course, with electronic ballot machines controlling the elections, it's nearly impossible anymore - despite Herculean efforts - to get these rotten legislators out of office.
This is a brief recap regarding HR 48 issued by Don:
Constitutional Amendment (HB 48)
"Voting is one of our most fundamental civil rights. The legislature must not prevent the citizenry from voting on one of the most critical issues of our generation. Neither the legislature nor the judiciary has the right to determine societal norms. Let the people have the final say.
"Democrats are afraid. Much of the opposition to HB 48 arises from the fear that a marriage amendment on the ballot will greatly increase the turnout of Republican voters as evidenced by other states that have had similar amendments. Desperate attempts, by the Democrats, to avoid the issue include a rule change to prevent constitutional amendments from the floor and a proposed bill (Simmons) that would stop court action until 2007.
"Waiting could mean defeat. If the legislature does not amend the constitution during this session and the higher court affirms Judge Murdock's decision, same-sex marriage becomes immediately legal. Any constitutional change would have to wait until November 2008 to be ratified. To force two years of same-sex marriage on the people without their consent is unconscionable.
"Impeachments are not complicated. According to the Office of the Attorney General, an impeachment begins with either a memorial or resolution suggesting a Senate investigation into the conduct of a judge. Resolutions come from the House. Memorials are letters signed by citizens. The Senate holds a trial and if two-thirds concur, the judge is removed.
The other method of judge removal is by address, which is essentially a letter from the Senate to the Governor requesting the removal of the public official.
This is not the first time impeachment charges have been filed in Maryland. Impeachment resolutions were read against Judge Samuel Chase in 1794. Addresses were written to remove Judge Henry Stump in 1860 and Sheriff Richard Lee, Jr. in 1769.
"High crimes and misdemeanors" could easily apply to this case. Maryland law provides no standard for impeachment charges but the implied standard is "high crimes and misdemeanors" because of common law and federal precedent. Precisely what that phrase means, however, can be quite subjective.
"Samuel Chase was charged for holding two offices of profit - Chief Justice of the Court of Oyer and Chief Judge of the General Court.
"Henry Stump was charged with "the habitual use of intoxicating drinks," "acting in a gross, vulgar, and undignified manner," and "render[ing] his Court utterly inefficient for the protection of public morals and public peace."
"J. G. Jenkins, a federal judge, was charged with "intimidation" and "abuse of powers" for issuing writs to prevent railroad workers from forming a union.
Judge Murdock's decision completely disregards Article 5 of the Declaration of Rights. Potential charges against the judge are numerous but the most important violation is the judge's complete disregard for Maryland citizens' entitlement to the common law of England as it existed in 1776. English common law defines marriage for us and Maryland's Constitution clearly appeals to this authority. Any opinion that redefined marriage would at least have to explain its rejection of that standard (and inherent definition.) Judge Murdock simply chose to ignore it."
I confirmed via telephone on February 18, 2006, from Don, that the resolution to impeach Judge Murdock has gone to legislative services and should be presented on the house floor in about two weeks. If you live in the State of Maryland, I urge you to get the word out on this effort because Don and his colleagues in the legislature need your support. They need you to be a modern day Paul Revere and help fight for what is right. Americans not in a state of denial or self imposed comas know that if we don't begin impeaching judges who overstep their authority, they will continue legislating from the bench.
The American people are crying out for leadership and these individuals in power are providing it, but they need your support. If Americans who live in these states don't make an all out effort to get the word out (radio, flyers plastered all over the state, one page with bullet points and contact numbers) and attend town hall meetings to hand out flyers, these courageous state legislators are not going to be able to get the job done.
There has to be tremendous heat put on all members at these state houses. Please get out and support these fine Americans who represent you. For part 2 click below.
Click here for part -----> 2
© 2006 Devvy Kidd - All Rights Reserved
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty, which sold close to 2,000,000 copies. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Your complimentary copy of the 32-page report may be obtained from El Dorado Gold. Devvy is a contributing writer for www.NewsWithViews.com.
Devvy's website: www.devvy.com
E-mail is: firstname.lastname@example.org