Leading the Nation for
J.A.I.L.
SDJA: (605)
231-1418
J.A.I.L. - An Inherent
Right Of ALL People Everywhere
By Barbie, ACIC, National
J.A.I.L. Admin.
In the past few months, a lot of our new
people joining J.A.I.L. are from non-initiative states who want to "do
what they're doing in South Dakota" in their states-- New York, Texas,
Tennessee, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Georgia, Massachusetts, Kansas, just to
name a few we've heard from lately. I've had to dampen their spirits by
telling them that their state is not an initiative state, which means that
J.A.I.L. cannot be passed by the People in those states, but must be
presented as proposed legislation and passed by the
Legislature.
The frequency with which I've had to say
this to numerous new people who are on fire for J.A.I.L. after seeing
the accomplishments developing in South Dakota, has caused me to be
haunted with the idea that there is something wrong with this picture. Why are
the People in only half our states able to pass a measure without having to go
to the Legislature? Are only half our states so kind and benevolent as
to "allow" its inhabitants to initiate the passage of laws?
The more I thought of it, the more I
began to realize that the disparity between the initiative and non-initiative
states is a serious injustice to the People as a whole. This injustice is as
it relates to the right of the People to alter and reform their
government when it becomes destructive of their rights. Do
only some people have this right, while others do not?
The legislature is not in a position to
"allow" or "disallow" this right of the People. It is a natural right --an
unalienable right-- a right that cannot, by nature, be alienated or
ignored by government. We are guided by the words of the Declaration of
Independence-- NOTE: I said "words of" the DOI, whether or not the Declaration
itself is considered to be a legal document of authority in this country-- it
doesn't matter. We can be guided by those words because they represent
self-evident truth, regardless of who signed the
document, what organization the signers were members of, what hidden purpose
they had in mind when signing it, or any fraud that may have been involved by
the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The People must
not be distracted by the fraud any longer!
The words of the DOI that are based on the
laws of nature states as a self-evident truth of
nature that the People have created government for the purpose of securing
their inherent rights. That's not just a matter of opinion-- it's
unadulterated truth --regardless of who expressed the fact or in what document
it was expressed. It stands on its own!
Furthermore, the words of the DOI
communicates the fact that whenever government breaches the responsibility for
which it was created (instituted) by the People, the People, from whom
government derives its just powers, have not just the right, but the DUTY, to
repair that breach by altering or reforming their government in such a way
that will insure the respect and protection of their inherent rights by its
government. Bear in mind, the Declaration of Independence does not grant those
rights-- they exist by nature, regardless of any document. The document merely
assures us of the fact that independently exists. That assurance doesn't
depend upon the authenticity of the document, nor of any document.
Likewise, state constitutions do not grant
inherent rights, such as the right of the People to alter or reform their
government when it becomes destructive of their rights. They merely
acknowledge the right --at least the initiative states do. For instance, the
California Constitution states "All political power is inherent
[emphasis added] in the people. Government is instituted for
their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or
reform it when the public good may require." (Art.II, Sec.1).
The South Dakota Constitution states: "All
political power is inherent in the people, and all free government is founded
on their authority, and is instituted for their equal protection and benefit,
and they have the right in lawful and constituted methods to alter or reform
their forms of government in such manner as they may think proper. ..." (Art.
VI, �26).
Similar provisions are made in other state
constitutions, acknowledging the existence of the inherent right of the People
to alter or reform government in whatever way they deem necessary to assure
the protection of their rights by government. But what about states that do
not acknowledge this right? Does that mean that the People of those states do
not have that right? Of course not!
J.A.I.L. is a means by which the People
must perform their duty --an inherent right-- to alter and reform government,
in this instance the judiciary, in such manner as they deem proper, in this
instance by holding the judiciary accountable to the People for violations of
law as specifically set forth in the J.A.I.L. amendment. Do the People have
the right to do this in only some of the states? Absolutely not! The People
have that inherent right in all states-- even the world, wherever nature
exists. Remember-- no document grants that right to the People.
It is government's responsibility to
respect and protect that right of the People as well as any other inherent
right. In the "initiative states" government provides the means of signing
petitions according to rules established for that purpose. Whether or not only
registered voters possess the right may be questionable. Certainly only state
residents of a minimum age would qualify for a state measure (in my opinion).
But a model of the initiative process must be allowed in all states as part of
government's responsibility of securing that right. It isn't within the
discretion of government to "allow" such process for the People--
it is a mandatory responsibility of all
governments.
The same right exists with the federal
government. But, in my opinion, that's another "ball of wax" that should
probably wait until we get the state systems obedient first before attempting
to unravel the federal mess. The People will decide. The Federal J.A.I.L. Bill
is written up as legislation, although it should be an amendment to the
organic Constitution since it was not included in the Constitution
when originally created. The People are sure suffering from that absence now.
Had the J.A.I.L. provision been originally included in the Constitution, we'd
be living in an entirely different world, where the sovereignty of the People
and the laws of nature would be respected and obeyed.
-Barbie