Welcome to Unalienable Rights Foundation!

· Home
· AvantGo
· Content
· Downloads
· Members_List
· Stories_Archive
· Surveys
· Top
· Topics
· Web_Links

     What Are/Is

The Unalienable Rights Foundation

Inalienable Rights

Dillon Rule

Citizens Guide - Impeachment

     Random Headlines

UnAlienable Rights
[ UnAlienable Rights ]

·UVA under Investigation by U.S. Dept. of Education's OCR
· commitment to a government of laws
·Washington On Religion - Original Intent
·'If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested' 4th Amd
·Bill of Rights Celebrates its 217th Year
·Can Law Schools Have Part of the Federal Pie Without Obligations


What is a UARF Fellow 

     CNN LAW
·Court upholds limits on Navy sonar training
·Slain wife accuses husband from the grave
·Prosecutors drop parent-killing case
·Priest accused of lying in mob investigation
·Inmate shot dead after brazen escape
·Juror: Judge and jury pressured me to convict
·Man convicted for Internet hoax death
·Zoloft killer's 30-year sentence appealed
·Girl who shielded mom is a hero at school
·Holloway disappearance hits cold case file


     Instructions For Replying to Our FOIA


Instructions for Responding to
Our FOIA Request to You Click Below

Unalienable Rights Foundation: NEWS-UNALIENABLE-RIGHTS

Search on This Topic:   
[ Go to Home | Select a New Topic ]

 Government Barriers to Economic Growth:

The Federalist Society

Government Barriers to Economic Growth: How Government Error Gave Us the Great Depression, the ‘Financial’ Crisis, and the Great Recession

The Richmond Lawyers Chapter

John Tamny

Start : Monday, November 18, 2013 12:00 PM

End   : Monday, November 18, 2013 1:30 PM

Add To Your Calendar


Tidewater Room at SunTrust Center
919 East Main Street
Richmond, VA 23219



    Posted by editor on Sunday, November 17 @ 03:56:18 MST (3607 reads)
    (Read More... | Score: 0)

 Recall by majority vote provided for in Virginia's Constitution


Recall by majority vote provided for in Virginia's Constitution

Silence on procedures however

Art. 1 § 3 (1971) Bill of Rights ~ Va. Constitution;

That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community;

of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration;

and, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal [a sound, healthy, or prosperous state: well-being; : body politic, commonweal; Middle English wele, from Old English wela; akin to Old English wel well. First Known Use: before 12th century via http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/weal ~ added by UARF] [Emphasis added];

Posted by editor on Wednesday, September 18 @ 11:43:24 MST (3814 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Mr. Stephen MooreEditorial Board Member and Senior Economics Writer


Federalist Society Logo

The Washington, D.C. Lawyers Chapter presents its monthly:

 D.C. Luncheon

Wednesday, January 26, 2011



Mr. Stephen Moore

Editorial Board Member and Senior Economics Writer
The Wall Street Journal



For upcoming Student and Lawyers Chapters events:
Click here
The Federalist Society

1015 18th Street, NW
Suite 425
Washington, D.C. 20036
Tel: (202) 822-8138
Fax: (202) 296-8061
  DATE: Wednesday, January 26, 2011
  TIME: 12:00 noon - 1:30 p.m.
  LOCATION:  Tony Cheng's Restaurant
                          619 H Street, N.W.
                          (Gallery Place Metro)
  COST: $15 for members, $20 for guests

Space is limited for this event.

Please click here to register online for this D.C. Luncheon; you can still pay at the door by completing your registration online. Please include the names of all registrants.
Please call 202-822-8138 with questions.

The Federalist Society


Posted by david on Monday, January 24 @ 08:47:08 MST (9765 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Public Defenders Often are Just as Effective as Private Counsel, Study Says

NEWS-UNALIENABLE-RIGHTSAnonymous writes "Public Defenders Often are Just as Effective as Private Counsel, Study Says

A study of Chicago-area courts found that public defenders often are just as effective as private lawyers in persuading judges to grant bail, accept plea bargains and sentence defendants appropriately.

But for some defendants, the study found, retaining a private lawyer may be money well-spent, according to Miller-McCune. The bimonthly magazine, which focuses on public policy and academic research, is published by the Miller-McCune Center, a nonprofit in Santa Barbara, Calif.

For white defendants, having a private lawyer makes it 2.7 times more likely that they will get bail. And black defendants with a private lawyer are twice as likely to get the original charge reduced, the article reports.

The study, led by Richard Hartley (PDF) of the University of Texas at San Antonio, is discussed in the Journal of Criminal Justice and abstracted on Science Direct.

It was based on a random sample of 2,850 offenders convicted of felonies in Cook County, Illinois."

Posted by david on Friday, August 27 @ 05:12:14 MST (3027 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Senate Approves Bill Regulating Tobacco Companies


The Senate has voted to give the government extensive new powers to decide how tobacco companies will make and market their products. Supporters say that could spare millions from smoking addiction and premature death.

The legislation would for the first time give the Food and Drug Administration legal authority to regulate and order changes to tobacco products in the interest of public health. Thursday's vote was 79-17. FDA authority over tobacco has long been a goal of anti-smoking advocates who say it could reduce an annual toll of 400,000 tobacco-related deaths. The House has passed its own similar version, and a resolution of differences would send it to President Barack Obama, who supports it.

Posted by david on Thursday, June 11 @ 15:19:17 MST (3175 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Jefferson: Some of His Thoughts

NEWS-UNALIENABLE-RIGHTS I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences
attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. -
Thomas Jefferson

Posted by david on Saturday, May 23 @ 11:53:45 MST (3333 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 President Nixs Seperation of Church and State


Obama Continues Bush's Policy of Mixing Church and State VIA White House  Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and the Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships

New Federal Initiatives Project

President Barack Obama announced President Bush’s White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives will continue in his administration under the name “the Office on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.”  It will focus on four priorities: (1) ensuring community groups are a key part of the economic recovery and the reduction of poverty, (2) examining ways to support women and children, address teen pregnancy, and reduce abortions, (3) encouraging responsible fatherhood, and (4) fostering interfaith dialogue with leaders and scholars around the world.

President Obama appointed Joshua DuBois to lead the office.  Mr. DuBois, 26, is a former Pentecostal pastor and advisor to Mr. Obama in his U.S. Senate office and Presidential campaign. Some critics note that Mr. DuBois has no experience working with charities.

A new President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships (COFANP), composed of religious and secular leaders and scholars from different backgrounds, will work with the White House Office. 

Posted by MultumInParvo on Thursday, April 23 @ 06:19:36 MST (3508 reads)
(Read More... | 34727 bytes more | Score: 0)

 the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

NEWS-UNALIENABLE-RIGHTS The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

On 18 December 1979, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. It entered into force as an international treaty on 3 September 1981 after the twentieth country had ratified it. By the tenth anniversary of the Convention in 1989, almost one hundred nations have agreed to be bound by its provisions.

The Convention was the culmination of more than thirty years of work by the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, a body established in 1946 to monitor the situation of women and to promote women's rights. The Commission's work has been instrumental in bringing to light all the areas in which women are denied equality with men. These efforts for the advancement of women have resulted in several declarations and conventions, of which the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women is the central and most comprehensive document.

Among the international human rights treaties, the Convention takes an important place in bringing the female half of humanity into the focus of human rights concerns. The spirit of the Convention is rooted in the goals of the United Nations: to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity,v and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women. The present document spells out the meaning of equality and how it can be achieved. In so doing, the Convention establishes not only an international bill of rights for women, but also an agenda for action by countries to guarantee the enjoyment of those rights.

In its preamble, the Convention explicitly acknowledges that "extensive discrimination against women continues to exist", and emphasizes that such discrimination "violates the principles of equality of rights and respect for human dignity". As defined in article 1, discrimination is understood as "any distinction, exclusion or restriction made o.1 the basis of sex...in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field". The Convention gives positive affirmation to the principle of equality by requiring States parties to take "all appropriate measures, including legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men"(article 3).

Posted by MultumInParvo on Tuesday, April 14 @ 12:34:45 MST (4289 reads)
(Read More... | 68292 bytes more | Score: 5)

 Are Pro-Lifers Extortionist and Racketeers



Scheidler v. National Organization for Women (04-1244); Operation
Rescue v. National Organization for Women (04-1352)
Oral argument date: Nov. 30, 2005

The National Organization of Women ("NOW") sued Scheidler and other
anti-abortion protestors, arguing that the protestors' conduct was in
violation of federal and state extortion laws, with liability created
by the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"). The
protestors were found guilty of 117 extortion-based acts and four "acts
or threats of physical violence." Accordingly, the district court
granted a permanent injunction against the protestors under RICO. The
case went to the Supreme Court, which held that the protestors' actions
did not constitute extortion and ordered the Seventh Circuit to reverse
"all of the predicate acts supporting the jury's finding of a RICO
violation," and to vacate the injunction. However, the Seventh Circuit
interpreted "all of the predicate acts" to refer to only the 117
extortion-based acts, and not the four acts of physical violence,
because the Supreme Court never specifically reviewed the legality of
the four acts.

Now the Supreme Court has granted certiorari to determine, among other
questions, whether the Seventh Circuit ignored its order to dismiss
"all of the predicate acts" by preserving the four acts of violence.
The protestors argue that the Seventh Circuit's failure to dismiss "all
of the predicate acts" improperly ignores the Supreme Court's order and
that the federal law in question, the Hobbs Act, can only be violated
by acts of extortion, not mere acts of violence. NOW argues that an
"act or threat of physical violence" may be a violation of the Hobbs
Act, and that the Seventh Circuit properly confined the Supreme Court's
order to dismissing only the 117 extortion-based acts. This case is
especially interesting from a procedural standpoint, as it will address
how an appellate court should interpret an order of the Supreme Court
where that order may be broader than the Court's original scope of
certiorari. For the average person, however, the Court's interpretation
of the Hobbs Act will affect the extent to which organizations may
protest without violating federal laws, as well as potentially expand
the Federal Government's police power.

Posted by mark on Thursday, October 13 @ 08:42:33 MST (3721 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

 Minor's Rights to Abortion v Parent's Unalienable Rights



Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of N. New England (04-1144)

Oral argument date: Nov. 30, 2005

Under the New Hampshire Parental Notification Prior to Abortion Act,
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 132:24-28 (2003), parental notification is
required before a minor can obtain an abortion. Among the few
exceptions the statute provides is for cases in which the minor's
physician cannot satisfy the parental notification requirement before
the minor will die. However, there is no explicit exception to allow
for an abortion without parental notification where the minor will
sustain non-fatal injuries if the physician refrains from performing
the abortion in order to satisfy the Act's parental notification
requirement. Respondents, Planned Parenthood of Northern New England
and others, claim that the Act is unconstitutional because (1) it lacks
a specific exception to the notification requirement where the minor's
health is imperiled and (2) the death exception provided is too
narrow. Petitioner New Hampshire claims that a health exception is not
required because of the interests the Act seeks to protect—the
potentiality of human life and the protection of minors from
undertaking a risky operation without the advice and support of the
minor's parent(s). The lower courts agreed with Planned Parenthood and
found that the Act was unconstitutional because of its lack of a
specific health exception and because of the Act's narrow death

The Supreme Court's decision will have a major impact on parental
notification laws. If the Court agrees with New Hampshire, then states
will not have to provide explicit health exceptions in their abortion
laws. Further, New Hampshire's death exception will stand in its
current state, providing for criminal liability where a physician acts
at least negligently in performing an abortion without notification.

Posted by mark on Thursday, October 13 @ 08:26:20 MST (5749 reads)
(Read More... | Score: 0)

     T R A N S L A T I O N S
Translations Language
Helpcom Spanish Spanish

Helpcom French

 Helpcom German German
Helpcom Italian Italian

     Categories Menu
There isn't content right now for this block.

     Big Story of Today
There isn't a Biggest Story for Today, yet.

     Old Articles
Thursday, October 13
· Drugs and Religion Do They Mix?
Wednesday, October 05
· Subcommittee Studying Operations of Circuit Court     
Sunday, September 04
· Monopoly, City Council, BRAC, Navy Who Won
Tuesday, August 23
· Court Promotes Coviting - City of Novi v. Robert Adell
Monday, August 22
· Supreme Court Violates Moral Law and Common Law Refusing To Rehear KELO
Wednesday, July 27
· Patrick County Take Lead In Stopping Eminent Domain
Monday, July 11
Monday, July 04
Friday, July 01
· do equal right to the poor and rich
· Highlights of the 2004-05 Supreme Court Term
· Eminent Domain****Suzette Kelo Continues The Good Fight
Friday, June 24
Thursday, June 23
· Congresswoman's Role in Law Enforcement Matters
Monday, June 20
· National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries )Violates the Endangered
Friday, June 10
· On the Commons Features Tom De Weese
Tuesday, May 24
· Are Christian Values a Violation of Nondiscrimination Laws
Friday, May 13
· Stephen Merrill will be featured on Shu Barthomew's On The Commons
Saturday, April 30
· URF'S Founders Are Guest on the Radio Program On the Commons
Wednesday, April 27
Monday, April 25
· Kelo v New London - Eminent Domain Abuse
Monday, April 18
· Draft of the Unalienable Rights Foundation's Proposed Public Access Law
· Race-based peremptory challenges violate the Constitution
Saturday, April 09
· The Clarence Darrow of pro se lawyers wins again on Eastern Shore
Thursday, April 07
Friday, April 01
· A TALE OF TWO CITIES New London v Baltimore Eminent Domain
Wednesday, March 30
· Article VI of Constitution Being Violated in Eminent Domain
Tuesday, March 22
· Religious Rights v Duty To Protect Public
Thursday, March 17
· Fla High Court Turns Bind Eye on Declaration of Independence

Older Articles

     US Supreme Court Today

301 Moved Permanently

" target="new">301 Moved Permanently




     Is What I Got From UARF from UARF?
Is what you got really from UARF

Web site powered by Web Hosting USA

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © MM - MMXIII by the UnAlienable Rights Foundatation.

WWW http://www.uarf.us

You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php or ultramode.txt
Copyright, MMVIII, Unalienabe Rights Foundation (UARF), All Rigths Reserved
Page Generation: 0.74 Seconds