The IRS and EPA are violations of the Constitution. They have NO right under our Constitution to make law. Only the Legislative branch does!
Read the Constitution! You might be enlightened!!!
7 comments
I'm almost afraid to ask, but what makes you think those two agencies make law?
*cringes and braces, knowing afchief will blame Obama*
Since he's complaining specifically about these two Organizations, I'm gonna hazard a guess.
He doesn't want to pay taxes so he can have more money to spend how he wants.
He dislikes the EPA because he has to curtail pollution/littering, which also cuts into his fun money.
So, He's Dogwhistling about having to give up some of his 'Precious money'
Also, driving cars is a constitutional human right, a court with a gold fringed flag follows Admirality Law*, and you are not a person, because the person is spelled in ALLCAPS and your birth certificate, therefore Kenyan Usurper Obama is not a person.
* Considering how inportant this appears to be to Sovereign Citizenry: Is this actually common?
Re: antichrist:
At least for the EPA, I guess it lies in prohibiting specific sustances and procedures.
They do have the constitutional authority to make laws:
1) the legislature has authority to make laws
2) the legislature has the authority to delegate law-making to executive agencies
3) they have delegated some law-making authority to those agencies.
The EPA and IRS ability to promulgate regulations comes from Congress's legislative authority.
Mimic,
IANAL (I'm a law student), but a quick case law search reveals that at least one circuit court of appeals has discussed the issue, finding the claim to be "indisputably meritless" without further analysis of the issue. Eidson v. Burrage, 113 Fed. App'x 860, 862 (10th Cir. 2004).
Other courts have also touched on this issue and have universally found these claims meritless. One decision out of the Tennessee Supreme Court noted in a footnote that "We note that the display of the United States flag with gold fringe is common in many ceremonial settings, including courtrooms. From a historical and legal standpoint, the use of fringe on the flag has no inherent or established symbolism. It has nothing to do with the jurisdiction of the court or with martial law. It is purely a decorative addition to enhance the appearance of the flag." State v. Hall, 8 S.W.3d 593, 603 n.4 (Tenn. 1999).
Basically, it sounds like a good argument (ish) if you squint at it and don't think about it too hard. And you don't understand that no court has *ever* taken it seriously.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.