Civilian Review of SCOTUS Grand Jury Case History

To Determine its Suitability for Use in the Constitutional Safe Zone Initiative

By 1%Watchdog,
Founder of the Freedom Movement USA and Freedom Institute

Introduction

These are some of the standing SCOTUS rulings on the institution of the Grand Jury summarized in the opinion by Justice Scalia in United States vs Williams 1992.

(PDF download link via Library of Congress http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep504/usrep504036/usrep504036.pdf)

Power of Civilian Review

Of course, the power of civilian review held by the Civilian Authority of We the People under the 9th and 10th Amendments (superior to SCOTUS’s judicial review), does not require us to agree with any or all of these rulings and opinions.

The Civilian Authority of We the People are the final determiners, under God, of the constitutionality of all Executive Branch actions, Congressional legislation and SCOTUS decisions. SCOTUS is only supreme in legal decisions in relation to the 3 branches of the US federal government, but only so long, and to the degree, we consent to be governed by them (Declaration of Independence...power of governing derived by consent of the governed).

As such, we can certainly nullify, overrule, and declare any and all rulings unconstitutional as the collective sovereign ruler of the United States of America when we feel the need to do so to alter or abolish a government that has become destructive to our rights - not only is this our right, it is declared to be our duty - as we see fit for our security and happiness (Declaration of Independence).

If however we consent to be subject to these judicial rulings and opinions, then we may utilize them for conducting our affairs in holding the government accountable and enforcing the Constitution through the 12 steps of the Constitutional Safe Zone initiative. (http://cszhq.gq), which is a platform wholly constituted for the exercise of our civic duties, rights and powers (Bill of Rights).

Opinion

For the most part, these rulings do support the independent functioning of the grand jury by the Civilian Authority of We the People. There are many positive statements by Justice Scalia supporting our rights that are very much appreciable.

Objections

There are, however, some superficial statements or observations he made that may prove questionable, problematic and even objectionable in practically applying the principles of the grand jury like,

“Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices”.

We would argue that just because it generally operates in a courthouse under judicial auspices, it need not be required to do so and can wholly independently operate anywhere convenient to, and under the auspices of, the Civilian Authority of We the People on the basis of all the other statements made in this case regarding the nature and function of grand juries (paraphrased):

• “The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts”
• “Courts do not preside over the functioning of the grand jury”
• “No such "supervisory" judicial authority of the courts exists over the grand jury.”
• “The grand jury has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches of government described in the first three Articles of the Constitution.”
• “The grand jury is a constitutional fixture in its own right.”
• “The whole theory of the grand jury’s function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional
  Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”
• “Its institutional relationship with the Judicial Branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm's length.”

Learn more at http://cszhq.gq