Persecution of communists’ in (fake) western democracies: case law summaries

Q:To what extent did public and political opinion in the west undermine the impartiality of judicial decision-making during the cold-war era?
—————————————-

USA

In a famous dissent, Justice Douglas of the US Supreme Court declared:

‘We have deemed it more costly to liberty to suppress despised minorities than to let them vent their spleen’ (Dennis v United States U.S. 494 at p. 585 (1951) (U.S.S.C.).

No western democracy has practiced the tolerance exposed [mistake in video, it should read “expoused”] by Justice Douglas-in the above statement, without at some stage censoring unpopular organizations. Douglas was in a minority of two on a US Supreme Court bench which upheld convictions entered against Communist party sympathizers for conspiring to overthrow the US government. (Joseph, P,think it’s “1998” edn., Constitutional and Administrative Law in New Zealand, ).

In Dennis v United States, above, the US Supreme Court upheld convictions against communist party officials for conspiring to teach or advocate the overthrow of the government by force or violence. Here, the Court considered that the advocacy of the communist doctrine was to be equated with conspiring to forcibly overthrow the US government.

Dennis was decided in 1951, at the height of cold-war tensions between the USSR and the US. Justice Black aligned with Justice Douglas in the minority stating:

‘Public opinion being what it is now, few will protest the conviction of these Communist petitioners. There is hope, however, that in calmer times, when present pressures, passions, and fears subside, this or some other later court will restore the First Amendment liberties to the high place where they belong in a free society.’ (Dennis, supra, at 581).

Justice Black’s statement was realized six years later in Yates v United States 354 U.S. 298 (1957) (U.S.S.C). This time, a differently constituted Supreme Court bench quashed the convictions of 14 Communist Party leaders that had been entered for similar reasons under the same Act.

With the easing of east-west relations, the Court drew a clear distinction between the advocacy of forcible overthrow of government-as an abstract doctrine, and the advocacy of action to achieve that result.

According to legal philosopher Wolfgang Friedman, it was impossible to remove the judgment of the US Supreme Court from the political tensions and public opinions that existed at that time. (W. Friedman, Legal Theory, (4th edn. , 1960, at p.95).

Australia

Australia also expressed abhorrence at communist doctrine during the post-war era. In Burns v Ransley (1949) 79 C.L.R. 101 (H.C.), the Australian High Court upheld a conviction for sedition entered against a communist speaker who, when asked, announced that, in the event of a war, he would fight on the side of the Soviet Union. He was convicted for words he had spoken in reply to a hypothetical question, and not for inciting mutiny or violence.

The following year the Communist Party Dissolution Act 1950 (Cth) declared the Australian Communist Party to be a revolutionary organization which jeopardized the defence of the Commonwealth. The statute dissolved the Communist Party and all affiliated organizations declared illegal under the Act.

The fundamental democratic principle of freedom of expression was restored when a majority of the High Court of Australia in Australian Communist Party v Commonwealth (1951) 83 CLR 1, declared the Communist Dissolution Act 1950 (Cth) to be unconstitutional and beyond the defence powers of the Commonwealth (see also R v Sharky (1949) 79 CLR 121).

New Zealand

During the early 1980s in New Zealand, Priminister Robert Muldoon took exception to the Socialist Unity Party and questioned it’s right to exist in a free and democratic society. However, a government, expounding the rule of law, must demonstrate greater justification for out-lawing a particular group or organization, for reasons other than personal enmity (Joseph, supra, at p.191).

See also New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s.14 (right to freedom of expression), and related case law; and Human Rights Act 1993, s.21(j)(prohibits discrimination on grounds of political opinion) incorporated, by reference, into s.19 NZBORA; note also- Crimes (Repeal of Seditious Offences) Amendment Act 2007; & see Flags, Emblems, and Names Protection Act 1981, s.11 (offences involving New Zealand flag)

Duration : 0:4:20

Read more about Persecution of communists’ in (fake) western democracies: case law summaries

The Return to De Jure Constitutional Law is RIGHT NOW underway. Stay Vigillant

http://www.halfpasthuman.com/

“Lipper’s” Channel – http://www.youtube.com/user/TheLipperTube

RAP –
http://www.restoreamericaplan.net/
http://guardiansofthefreerepublics.com/front-page.html
http://restoreamericaplan.blogspot.com/

Duration : 0:10:2

Read more about The Return to De Jure Constitutional Law is RIGHT NOW underway. Stay Vigillant

NH: Gun Trial of Free Stater could challenge carry laws

Sponsor: http://PledgeBank.com/Next1000 – Arrested for open carrying inside a vehicle without government permission…Bill Walker of Grafton, NH hopes to turn trouble into triumph. This case conceivably could go before the state Supreme Court, pitting New Hampshire’s Constitution against its concealed carry law. Walker’s trial is October 28, details at link below.

To donate for their legal defense:
http://williamwalker.chipin.com/william-walker-conceal-carry-case

To get the latest details on case or inform us of your availability to videotape trial:
http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=15667.0

Music by:
http://ccmixter.org/files/minimal_art/8652

If you want to commission an ad like the one in this video, the cost as of 10/08 is three cents per video view. But views after the first week are free. And your link in the video descrip is free. Message me through this site or e-mail me: RidleyReport at… live period com

Additional Keywords: second amendment sister 2nd open carry concealed firearms pistols revolvers ak-47 glock 19 sks gun control owners guns license weapons nra go-nh gonh
national rifle association pink pistols ryan marvin pro-gun dave ridley report ridleyreport free state project ron paul new hampshire william walker bill ivy ankrom sharon walker civil disobedience body armor law government police manchester grafton gun confiscation katrina new orleans fema …. Please thank our sponsor by visiting … PLEDGEBANK.COM/NEXT1000

Duration : 0:5:24

Read more about NH: Gun Trial of Free Stater could challenge carry laws

How i won my court case with no legal aid

a few tips just incase u find urself not being able to get legal aid and having to represent yourself at court.

Duration : 0:8:48

Read more about How i won my court case with no legal aid

Are you Free Man? This is not legal advice…1/4

To answer the question of ‘what acts and statutes’ are not regarded as law, the answer is none of them. To what Laws do you have to give authority to? Your own. Figure out what they are, then live by them (and serve notice, if you care to change anything for the others that are still slaves to the system…and the future)

Duration : 0:10:32

Read more about Are you Free Man? This is not legal advice…1/4

Abolish Religious Exemptions from the Law? (Part 2)

In the United States and other countries, religious institutions have traditionally enjoyed a privileged position, i.e., they have been granted exemptions from compliance with certain laws (including, without limitation, laws against discrimination in employment and laws requiring the payment of taxes). Is it appropriate or even useful for religion to have this privileged status?

Links:

1. Wisconsin Supreme Court’s use of the “ministerial exception” to dismiss an age discrimination case against a Catholic school system

http://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=38088

2. New York Court of Appeals decision in Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany v. Serio

http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I06_0127.htm

3. California Supreme Court’s decision in Catholic Charities of Sacramento v. Superior Court (Unfortunately, I can’t find a generally accessible URL for this decision. The citation is 85 P.3d 67 (2004).)

4. Jonathan Turley’s Op-Ed piece entitled “When it comes to religious groups, who’s really facing discrimination?”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/16/AR2010041602027.html

5. Employment Division v. Smith

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0494_0872_ZO.html

6. Bob Jones University v. United States

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0461_0574_ZO.html

7. New York Times article on the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association case

8. Part 1 of this video series

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5TBxCfnFiw

Duration : 0:9:56

Read more about Abolish Religious Exemptions from the Law? (Part 2)

Are you Free Man? This is not legal advice…3/4

To answer the question of ‘what acts and statutes’ are not regarded as law, the answer is none of them. To what Laws do you have to give authority to? Your own. Figure out what they are, then live by them (and serve notice, if you care to change anything for the others that are still slaves to the system…and the future)

Duration : 0:7:37

Read more about Are you Free Man? This is not legal advice…3/4

About The S E Farris Law Firm Personal Injury Attorney St Louis Missouri Free Case Evaluation Call 314 252 9937

farrislawfirmhttp://gdata.youtube.com/feeds/api/users/farrislawfirmPeopleAbout, The, S, E, Farris, Law, Firm, Personal, Injury, Attorney, St, Louis, Missouri, Free, Case, Evaluation, Call, 314, 252, 9937About The S E Farris Law Firm Personal Injury Attorney St Louis Missouri Free Case Evaluation Call 314 252 9937

Duration : 0:1:3

Read more about About The S E Farris Law Firm Personal Injury Attorney St Louis Missouri Free Case Evaluation Call 314 252 9937

Constitutional Law Prof. Frank Askin: Part 1

Prof. Frank Askin of the Rutgers Law School, NJ Constitutional Litigation Clinic on free speech in condos and co-ops. Featuring Twin Rivers and Galaxy complexes in NJ.

Duration : 0:28:26

Read more about Constitutional Law Prof. Frank Askin: Part 1