Back To Basics - Equal Protection Under The Law


The United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment's first section contains the Equal Protection clause. It reads as follows: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Where did equal protection under the law go? I see instances daily that prove to me this Constitutional protection has disappeared.

This issue is the crux of the entire matter of our out of control government. We can discuss social issues, military and foreign war issues, economic issues, all sorts of issues, but equal protection is THE issue. It's gone. But why? What happened? Looking back over the primary debates, Michele Bachmann was the only candidate who adamantly proposed "equal taxation" across all sectors of society. I believe Gingrich concurred, but it was Bachmann who insisted on it. She was marginalized and dropped out of the race. Romney never took a stand on this...not really. I fully expect he intends to pursue tax policies for his favored campaign donors and constituency, and that is what everyone on the left dreads. It is the same from both sides, just different special interests and constituencies.

The "progressive" income tax was the end of equal protection under the law. Once in place, this tax policy nullified all of the other "equal protections," precedent being set. The first instance of the "progressive" income tax was during the Civil War, but was repealed in 1872. Then, we can thank Woodrow Wilson for bringing it back in 1913. It has been downhill ever since.

Here is something from Freeman Online:

"America’s founders rejected the income tax entirely, but when they spoke of taxes they recognized the need for uniformity and equal protection to all citizens. “[A]ll duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States,” reads the U.S. Constitution. And 80 years later, in the same spirit, the Fourteenth Amendment promised “equal protection of the laws” to all citizens."

Notice the Obama - Marxist regime doesn't ever talk about Equal Justice, "equal protection of the laws." They are talking up "Social Justice," "Environmental Justice," "Economic Justice," and the like. What those terms mean is subsidizing a favored group, not equally, but taking from and giving to certain chosen sectors of society. Marxism, yet Obama was voted into the Presidency. None of that is Constitutional, but how many politicians over a century have been completely ignoring the Constitution by handing out tax policies for the benefit of special interests? We could not begin to count. And every one of them has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. How does that work? (Now you know why Nancy Pelosi haughtily smirked out the question, "Are you kidding," when asked about the Constitution with regard to Obamacare. It's all a joke by now.)

This is hardly news to my conservative blog-o-sphere friends. I wonder though, why this is not at the top of every political discussion. It is the crux of the matter. It is what everyone is fighting about, i.e. unequal taxation under the law. Laws restricting freedom begin with shutting down economic freedom. Once able to get away with that, all bets are off.

From the same article at Freeman Online:

In Federalist No. 10, Madison asked, “[W]hat are the different classes of legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they determine?” He went on to say, “The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice.”

Temptation won out? A century later we are so far down the pike on this, I wonder what it would take to go to the starting line again and get this right. Prosecutions? Never happen. Nullification? The Feds won't respect that.

Both parties are so engaged in unequal taxation that we are faced with no good options going forward. The only answer to this is a FLAT TAX and eliminating all subsidies and tax incentive programs, but what are the chances of that being passed when most all politicians are on the take? Money money money....

(As an aside, I heard the infamous Ezekiel Emanuel this morning on Morning Joe stating he would not be against taxing soda drinks. Really? Yes, really. No surprise, but this just emphasizes the case that Marxists will tax you out of any possible choices you might make for yourself. The preferred political tool of control freaks is taxation. If you don't like it, tax it.)

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.






Comments

comments

  • Hilda

    I don't understand why the many lawsuits against OzeroUNcare /
    UNaffordable UNcare Act have not included this violation, which I
    consider to be major. Politicians and their staff, Judges, unions and
    certain corporations get exceptions while the slaves get screwed. As
    far as I read, the clause applies at the state and federal level. What
    am I missing?

  • Saxondog

    Very important information that most do not realize. The answer is not simple but drastic. Action by force.armed force is needed,If we do not force this issue then this issue will and has already forced us to become SLAVES and Workers under Government Rule without the rule of Law.
    But I disagree on one point,the Politicians,one is all we need. One who will follow the example of Obama and ignore the Justice issue completely by Presidential executive order and abolish the IRS completely,as the Leader of the Executive branch of Government does the President not have the authority to fire Agency personnel?
    Well why not simply fire all the Government employees in this departments? Everyone else must face the threat of Job lose,why should Government workers not face the same issues?