Judge Napolitano on Cliven Bundy Ranch Invasion

Want to fight terrorism? Stand against the "uber-aggressive" federal government that lines up snipers against patriotic Americans while leaving our borders undefended and welcomes an invasion of illegals, including drug cartels and terrorists, crossing our borders unhindered. What's wrong with this picture?



The judge criticizes the "authoritative, militaristic ways" and the "overreach" of the Feds. He describes Bundy as becoming a popular national hero. "In the hearts and minds of Americans [Clive Bundy] he's won because he has resisted the uber-agressive enforcement by the federal government of their victory in court."

Read more here.

Napolitano on U.S. drone program: "It's a crime for you...to lie to the government...

...why isn't it a crime for the government to lie to us?....When the president thinks he can willy nilly use drones however and whenever and against whomever he wishes and then lie about it, we have a problem....The legal justification [for drones] was hogwash!"  More here.

Judge Andrew Napolitano on the Right to Bear Arms

Judge Andrew Napolitano, in an article in the Washington Post, gave a history lesson on the right to bear arms. It's not about hunting, it's about the right of citizens to defend themselves against tyrants. Can anyone doubt that our government has crossed the line into tyranny? When a sitting president gives himself the right to assassinate American citizens without trial or even judicial review, accountable to no one if he says the citizen is a "terrorist," what is left? (Even the New York Times took umbrage in an editorial.) As a pro-life activist, I might very well be on the government's list of "domestic terrorists" even though my biggest "crime" was being chained to an operating table in an abortion mill. So I am concerned about giving the right to any president to decide that some citizen he doesn't like is a terrorist deserving assassination. I am particularly concerned because liberals tend to think of, and often call, those who disagree with them terrorists and other names too vile to mention.

I recommend Judge Napolitano's entire article, but here's a taste:

The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, with the same instruments they would use upon us. If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and ammunition that the Nazis had, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust. 

Most people in government reject natural rights and personal sovereignty. Most people in government believe that the exercise of everyone’s rights is subject to the will of those in the government. Most people in government believe that they can write any law and regulate any behavior, not subject to the natural law, not subject to the sovereignty of individuals, not cognizant of history’s tyrants, but subject only to what they can get away with.

A Just Judge

A lot of judges in America are like the unjust judge of scripture who rules capriciously and only give the widow justice because he's afraid she will finally do something to injure him. So it's refreshing when you find a judge who believes in the rule of law and recognizes the danger to a country when the law is abused. If you aren't familiar with Judge Andrew Napolitano read this interview with him. Not only will you find out quite a lot about this good and decent man, but you'll also learn a lot about how our out-of-control law enforcement uses immoral means to trap and convict people. Is it any wonder that pro-lifers find themselves arrested for standing on public sidewalks and then the officers leaf through the statutes looking for something to pin on them?

And speaking of pro-lifers, here's what the judge says about abortion.

Reason: You said abortion is murder. Should it be regulated by the state or should it be prohibited by the state?

Napolitano: Absolutely it should be prohibited, just the way all unjust killings are prohibited.

Reason: Should doctors go to prison as murderers?

Napolitano: Yes.

Reason: First-degree murder?

Napolitano: Yes.

Reason: Should they get the death penalty--

Napolitano: I don't believe that the state has the moral authority to execute, so I don't believe in the death penalty.

Reason: But you do think that doctors who perform abortions should be put in jail as murderers? Every bit as much as Scott Peterson?

Napolitano: Yes. By a state government, not by the federal government, because the Constitution doesn't authorize the federal government to prosecute murderers. Roe v. Wade is wrong because there's isn't a scintilla in the Constitution or its history to justify federal legislation on abortion. It would then be up to the state of Kansas to allow it and Pennsylvania not to allow it.

While I disagree with the judge that any state has the moral authority to allow abortion, if Roe v. Wade had not passed abortion would probably be outlawed today. States that had permitted it were recriminalizing it when Roe came down.

Wouldn't you love to see this man on the Supreme Court? Sure won't happen on Obama's watch. But keep praying -- you never know what prayer can bring about.