Let me spell it out for you, because you are too cucked to understand a single thought going through an American mind.
The constitution is not and never was a contract AGAINST the people. It is the terms of existence of the federal government. Should the federal government violate the constitution, it ceases to exist. Literally, it loses all power of enforcement.
The ability to interpret the constitution is NOT vested in the Supreme Court. That is a farce invented by the Supreme Court. The people of the US never agreed to it. The president never agreed to it. Congress never agreed to it. The states never agreed to it.
You THINK that the Supreme Court has the final say in a matter but it does not. Once the Supreme Court has spoken, that is the law, sure, and maybe it is even AN interpretation of the constitution. However, we don't run around talking to each other about what the Supreme Court said, because we frankly don't care. Only lawyers care about that sort of stuff, and the only reason they care is because lower courts in the federal system are supposed to abide by the precedent of the Supreme Court.
The way the government is organized is roughly similar to the Roman Republic. You create a system that requires factions to cooperate to gain political power, but the political power is so weak that enforcing anything is practically impossible. Instead, leaders must rely on their ability to persuade people to do things to get anything done.
Let me go through, for instance, how our criminal laws work.
If you want to punish someone for a crime, the following things have to happen.
* A law has to be written and signed by the governor / president.
* The law must be constitutional. If it is not constitutional, it is no law and cannot be enforced.
* A crime has to occur. That is, someone with criminal intent must violate the law.
* You need witnesses who say they saw the crime and they saw who did it. These witnesses cannot be the spouse of the criminal.
* You need someone to report the crime to the police (unless the police saw the crime themselves.)
* The police need to investigate, first to convince themselves that a crime occurred and second to try and figure out who did it.
* Importantly, the police are limited in how they can investigate. Nobody has to speak to the police, and in fact people know, for the most part, never to talk to cops. They cannot obtain evidence by violating the right to privacy. They can only gather evidence if there is "probable cause" meaning that they are watching the crime unfold in front of their eyes or if they have a search warrant, which requires a judge to hear their reasons for the search and to grant them permission to search.
* Once the police have gathered enough evidence, they put it before a grand jury, which decides whether it is likely the individual can be found guilty and punished.
* The prosecutor must put the individual on trial within a few days. If there is no case, then the prosecutor must let the individual go. If the individual doesn't agree to more time before the trial, then he is let go unless the prosecutor can get the case before a judge.
* Because actually prosecuting a criminal case is virtually impossible in the US, the vast majority of the time the prosecutor negotiates a plea deal with the criminal where he ends up spending less time in jail or paying a lower fine. If a plea deal is reached, it goes before a judge who determines whether the deal is fair or not. IE, if the prosecutor wants to grant the individual immunity but the individual isn't providing enough in return, the judge might say "Not fair".
* OK, so the prosecutor can't get a plea deal, the grand jury says "guilty" and now it is time for trial. The defendant is given a lawyer (if he doesn't have one already) for free. The case moves to a criminal court where the judge looks at what they have and decides whether it is worth his time or not.
* The lawyers argue about who should ne on the jury. Eventually they come to an agreement.
* The case is heard. Witnesses are subpoenaed and so on and so forth.
* The jury decides BOTH the facts (whether X or Y happened) and the verdict (guilty or innocent.) Importantly, we have a LONG tradition of "jury nullification" where the jury could say "Yes, he absolutely broke the law, but we are saying not guilty because we really like the guy or we hate the law."
* Now he goes for sentencing. The judge decides how long he serves in prison, what fines to pay, etc...
* Now the case is appealed just in case anybody did anything wrong. Lawyers argue that such-and-such was invalid evidence, or a procedure wasn't followed, or the constitution was violated or whatever. So, even if the local judge, prosecutor and police colluded together to stick you in jail, they have to withstand further scrutiny.
As you can see, it is NOT a simple matter to put people in jail or punish them. Most of the time, nobody even uses the "law" to secure their property and persons. We just wait until someone does something really stupid and then shoot them and claim "self-defense". We are all basically sitting on our porches just watching our property line, waiting for someone to chimp out within our fence line. When we do outside to go shopping or eat at a restaurant, we are all watching each other, waiting for someone to do something really stupid so we can shoot them.
Niggers know this. They know that the white people carry because of them. They know that if they chimp out, they are going to die and the white guy is going to get off of all charges. Heck, he might even get an insurance payment.
Suppose the police turn on the white guy who shot a nigger, arrest him or whatever, and make him spend the next 10 years in prison on trumped-up charges. Eventually, he is going to win his appeal, and after the case is appealed, he sues the government and gets paid millions of dollars.
Derek Chauvin is going through this appeal process right now. He basically laid down and let them throw the book at him, knowing that they were violating his rights. He KNEW that if he survived prison (which he did) he was going to get out on appeal, and then he could turn around and sue the government for umpteen million dollars.
The people who got fired for not masking or not getting vaccinated -- same thing. They are winning case after case. Governments are shelling out millions and millions and settling cases rather than letting them go to court, where the juries can award the victims even more money.
NOW, LET ME SPELL THIS OUT FOR YOU EUROFAGS: You WANT the constitution. But it doesn't work UNLESS the people follow it. Meaning, the people know what is in it, and can tell cops to pound sand when the cops get out of line. The people KNOW they have guaranteed protected rights and sit in the interrogation room saying "I want a lawyer" rather than letting the cop intimidate them.
The constitution ONLY works when you have people who behave like Americans and refuse to kowtow to government demands.
When Canada joins the US, they will be a territory. They will have to form their own territorial government and demonstrate to the rest of the states that they are worthy of becoming another state or however we decide to divide them up. If they can't balance their budget and behave like an American state, and it requires the people behaving a certain way too, then they are not admitted and they won't be until they do. Hence, Puerto Rico is still a territory, and will likely NEVER become a state because they can't govern themselves and behave like civilized people.
The constitution is not and never was a contract AGAINST the people. It is the terms of existence of the federal government. Should the federal government violate the constitution, it ceases to exist. Literally, it loses all power of enforcement.
The ability to interpret the constitution is NOT vested in the Supreme Court. That is a farce invented by the Supreme Court. The people of the US never agreed to it. The president never agreed to it. Congress never agreed to it. The states never agreed to it.
You THINK that the Supreme Court has the final say in a matter but it does not. Once the Supreme Court has spoken, that is the law, sure, and maybe it is even AN interpretation of the constitution. However, we don't run around talking to each other about what the Supreme Court said, because we frankly don't care. Only lawyers care about that sort of stuff, and the only reason they care is because lower courts in the federal system are supposed to abide by the precedent of the Supreme Court.
The way the government is organized is roughly similar to the Roman Republic. You create a system that requires factions to cooperate to gain political power, but the political power is so weak that enforcing anything is practically impossible. Instead, leaders must rely on their ability to persuade people to do things to get anything done.
Let me go through, for instance, how our criminal laws work.
If you want to punish someone for a crime, the following things have to happen.
* A law has to be written and signed by the governor / president.
* The law must be constitutional. If it is not constitutional, it is no law and cannot be enforced.
* A crime has to occur. That is, someone with criminal intent must violate the law.
* You need witnesses who say they saw the crime and they saw who did it. These witnesses cannot be the spouse of the criminal.
* You need someone to report the crime to the police (unless the police saw the crime themselves.)
* The police need to investigate, first to convince themselves that a crime occurred and second to try and figure out who did it.
* Importantly, the police are limited in how they can investigate. Nobody has to speak to the police, and in fact people know, for the most part, never to talk to cops. They cannot obtain evidence by violating the right to privacy. They can only gather evidence if there is "probable cause" meaning that they are watching the crime unfold in front of their eyes or if they have a search warrant, which requires a judge to hear their reasons for the search and to grant them permission to search.
* Once the police have gathered enough evidence, they put it before a grand jury, which decides whether it is likely the individual can be found guilty and punished.
* The prosecutor must put the individual on trial within a few days. If there is no case, then the prosecutor must let the individual go. If the individual doesn't agree to more time before the trial, then he is let go unless the prosecutor can get the case before a judge.
* Because actually prosecuting a criminal case is virtually impossible in the US, the vast majority of the time the prosecutor negotiates a plea deal with the criminal where he ends up spending less time in jail or paying a lower fine. If a plea deal is reached, it goes before a judge who determines whether the deal is fair or not. IE, if the prosecutor wants to grant the individual immunity but the individual isn't providing enough in return, the judge might say "Not fair".
* OK, so the prosecutor can't get a plea deal, the grand jury says "guilty" and now it is time for trial. The defendant is given a lawyer (if he doesn't have one already) for free. The case moves to a criminal court where the judge looks at what they have and decides whether it is worth his time or not.
* The lawyers argue about who should ne on the jury. Eventually they come to an agreement.
* The case is heard. Witnesses are subpoenaed and so on and so forth.
* The jury decides BOTH the facts (whether X or Y happened) and the verdict (guilty or innocent.) Importantly, we have a LONG tradition of "jury nullification" where the jury could say "Yes, he absolutely broke the law, but we are saying not guilty because we really like the guy or we hate the law."
* Now he goes for sentencing. The judge decides how long he serves in prison, what fines to pay, etc...
* Now the case is appealed just in case anybody did anything wrong. Lawyers argue that such-and-such was invalid evidence, or a procedure wasn't followed, or the constitution was violated or whatever. So, even if the local judge, prosecutor and police colluded together to stick you in jail, they have to withstand further scrutiny.
As you can see, it is NOT a simple matter to put people in jail or punish them. Most of the time, nobody even uses the "law" to secure their property and persons. We just wait until someone does something really stupid and then shoot them and claim "self-defense". We are all basically sitting on our porches just watching our property line, waiting for someone to chimp out within our fence line. When we do outside to go shopping or eat at a restaurant, we are all watching each other, waiting for someone to do something really stupid so we can shoot them.
Niggers know this. They know that the white people carry because of them. They know that if they chimp out, they are going to die and the white guy is going to get off of all charges. Heck, he might even get an insurance payment.
Suppose the police turn on the white guy who shot a nigger, arrest him or whatever, and make him spend the next 10 years in prison on trumped-up charges. Eventually, he is going to win his appeal, and after the case is appealed, he sues the government and gets paid millions of dollars.
Derek Chauvin is going through this appeal process right now. He basically laid down and let them throw the book at him, knowing that they were violating his rights. He KNEW that if he survived prison (which he did) he was going to get out on appeal, and then he could turn around and sue the government for umpteen million dollars.
The people who got fired for not masking or not getting vaccinated -- same thing. They are winning case after case. Governments are shelling out millions and millions and settling cases rather than letting them go to court, where the juries can award the victims even more money.
NOW, LET ME SPELL THIS OUT FOR YOU EUROFAGS: You WANT the constitution. But it doesn't work UNLESS the people follow it. Meaning, the people know what is in it, and can tell cops to pound sand when the cops get out of line. The people KNOW they have guaranteed protected rights and sit in the interrogation room saying "I want a lawyer" rather than letting the cop intimidate them.
The constitution ONLY works when you have people who behave like Americans and refuse to kowtow to government demands.
When Canada joins the US, they will be a territory. They will have to form their own territorial government and demonstrate to the rest of the states that they are worthy of becoming another state or however we decide to divide them up. If they can't balance their budget and behave like an American state, and it requires the people behaving a certain way too, then they are not admitted and they won't be until they do. Hence, Puerto Rico is still a territory, and will likely NEVER become a state because they can't govern themselves and behave like civilized people.
