The United States claims to be a nation of laws, not of men and that no one is above the law. Yet recent news brings both of those statements into question.
For four years we have seen the so-called law enforcement arm of the federal government used to illegally attack political adversaries, yet not a single person has been held accountable so far. We’ve seen elections impacted by the violation of election laws, however only a few low-level offenders have even been charged.
That’s not to say that none who have violated the law have been held accountable, but sadly the list seems as partisan as it is small. If we continue to allow lawlessness to go unpunished, the outcome will be indistinguishable from anarchy. - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
Who is in charge of your children? That has been a perennial question that has grown in importance over the last few years. When I was a child, it was understood that, with rare exceptions, parents were in charge of a child’s upbringing. This included medical, religious, and educational decisions. However, over the last few decades, the role of the parent in these decisions has been replaced by experts. What happens when the goal of the experts differs from those of the parents? Who decides the future of the rising generations? It was understood that the state acted in loco parentis, in place of the parents, only for the safety of the child. A recent case in U.S. District Court shows that be it health departments, child services, schools, or even the courts. Government not only believes they know better than the parents, they are more than willing to act in loco parentis tyrannis.
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8897
With the release of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence (AI) applications, there has been a lot of speculation and downright assertions about our future. With over 30 years of experience in Information Technology (IT), not more than a passing understanding of AIs, I've come to the conclusion that much of what I've heard is more science fiction than fact. A recent court case decided in the D.C. District Court revolved around one very important question. Do AIs have rights?
In this third installment of the three-part series on the branches of government, we look at the role of the third and weakest branch. At least that is what our Founding Fathers thought of it. What is the role of the federal judiciary? What are the extent of their powers, how do they related to the other two branches of government, and why is a proper understanding of the role of the judiciary critical if the United States is to remain a constitutional republic?
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8575
Who knows best? Since the beginning of society the question of who knows best has been debated in one form or another. Should the strongest rule, is there a divine right to control others, or do the people rule themselves? The disagreements over who gets to decide have been dealt with in many ways as well. Most common has been through war and violence. Over the last couple of centuries, efforts have been made to decide via elections. And still today, there are those who disagree with the decisions of others, take on the mantel of elitist, and claim the power to tell others how to live their lives. - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
It appears that Donal Trump is making waves in the federal government. Interesting, if not controversial, picks for key cabinet positions, his 10-point plan to dismantle the deep state, and his immigration and other policies have driven some to see great changes on the horizon. The question is, is this a political tsunami or ripples in a pond? - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
How much pollution is too much? We all want clean air and water, but we still want our cars and flush toilets as well. The question in San Francisco v. EPA is how specific does the EPA need to be when it tells cities how much waste they can discharge into our nation’s waterways. From a constitutional standpoint, this case is not about waste water, but whether or not executive agencies have to follow the laws as written.
https://constitutionstudy.com/2024/11/18/448-san-francisco-v-epa-oral-arguments/
