Your Right to a Trial by Jury Has Been Compromised!

You may not be aware of it, but in 1989, the Supreme Court made a flagrantly unconstitutional decision. The case was Blanton v. N Las Vegas. In that case, the SC ruled that the accused in a criminal prosecution facing six months of incarceration is not entitled to a trial by jury. The Sixth Amendment reads in part:

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury...."

It is readily apparent that the SC has no regard for the plain text language used in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Even if you use the "original intent" school of thought about the Constitution, the First Congress intended the Sixth Amendment to apply to all but misdemeanors as defined in 1789. The right to a trial by jury in criminal cases is the only right that was deemed so important, that it was guaranteed in both the original Constitution and Bill of Rights. The following is the definition from Noah Webster's 1828 dictionary:

"Misdemeanors: In law, an offense of a less atrocious nature than a crime. Crimes and misdemeanors are mere synonymous terms; but in common usage, the word crime is made to denote offenses of a deeper and more atrocious dye, while small faults and omissions of less consequence are comprised under the gentler name of misdemeanors."

Certainly anyone who committed an act that justifies incarceration is guilty of a more serious crime than a misdemeanor of that time. "small faults and omissions" certainly are not serious enough to require incarceration.

I call on Congress to live up to your oaths of office and introduce a resolution that condemns the SC decision in Blanton v. N. Las Vegas. A resolution, which states an intent to bring impeachment proceedings against any judge, federal, state, or local who sentences a person who has demanded a jury trial to incarceration after denying him/her a trial by jury.

Congress' oaths were NOT to support the Constitution as interpreted by the SC. (An oath is a sacred promise to God, a solemn promise to the people of the United States.) Their oaths were to support the Constitution, itself. Anyone of the "living document" school of thought intends to violate the Constitution. The "living document" school of thought virtually means that we are being ruled by a committee of the nine justices of the Supreme Court. Article V of the Constitution prescribes the only method by which it can be changed. Supreme Court decree is not allowed to change the Constitution:

" The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;"

Reference for Supreme Court Decision:

http://caselaw.duicenter.com/blanton01.html