The Supreme Courts Is A Despotic Branch

According to the Federlist #78 the Judicial branch of the government is supposed to be the weakest branch because as for themselves they should have no ability to make laws or execute them. Our federal court as it is practiced today does both simply because the other two branches fail to stand up for their rights. They have exceeded their jurisdiction as well as their powers and the states have not stood up for their own rights. In short they have become tyrants pushing that no longer honor the rule of law but force their own agenda on the people. The people of the United State will not be truly free until the federal courts are brought back under the control of the Constitution and to that we need to pressure our state and federal officials to uphold and defend the Constitution.

In Article 3 Section 2 which I cite below you will see the scope of laws that the federal courts are to operate under,

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority

In Article 7 which I cite you will see these further defined and applied to state judges. The exception being federal laws not meant to uphold the Constitution.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

Now in reading these do you see any provision made for the use of foreign law or case law to adjudicate. It is true that foreign and case law like other documents can be used to help determine the original intent of the articles and amendments of the Constitution and for that purpose its use is acceptable. We are not obliged to live according to other countries laws even if a large number of countries hold to them.

Below I cite from Article 3 Section 2 the type of cases

to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

Amendment XI reads as follows.

The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.

The point I am trying to make from the following is that the federal courts do not have jurisdiction in any cases that are between a state and a citizen of the same state. I say this because that case is not mentioned and the Tenth Amendment states that if the Constitution does not give the federal government a power then that power remains the state’s. So if the courts were obeying the Constitution how did Roe v. Wade even make it into federal courts. For it to make it into federal courts a federal law would have had to been violated or a dispute between the federal government started either which would have the United States as one party. In Roe v. Wade the parties were Roe a citizen of Texas and the state of Texas.

I leave you with the below words from Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton.

"The Constitution . . . meant that its coordinate branches should be checks on each other. but the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch."

—Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1804.

For I agree, that "there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers."

Alexander Hamilton in The Federlist #78 Saturday, June 14, 1788