top of page

Why Aren't We Enforcing The Bill Of Rights?

"If anyone goes into a courtroom claiming their rights have been violated under Title 18 U.S.C. sections 241 and 242 the judge will laugh them out of their court. What idiot told you we should use those codes?"

"I know you're not calling ME an idiot, sir," I said.

The man I spoke with is well-versed in the legal system, and this is how he replied to me when I asked why we don't use those to clean House in our government. Not everyone is as serious as I am about defending our natural human rights, and those who claim they do, tend to have other motives when it comes to throwing the book at our corrupt government officials.

That's why you all need to stick around me for a while and take the knowledge I'm sharing as more ammo to protect yourself and your communities from the tyrants that rule over us.

So, of course, naturally, I had to prove him wrong.

Check this out, for over a century, the Bill of Rights was not being enforced. Slavery would not have existed if it had been. The problem was identified, and a solution was presented and signed into law. That is the answer to why these laws were created, and later in this discussion, you'll find out who introduced the amendment. But let's first address the big fat problem going on in our country today, even after laws were created to enforce the Bill of Rights in our country.

Every individual has the right to make their own personal, economic, and social decisions without unnecessary intervention and violent force from the government unless they have caused harm to another person or someone else's property. It is crucial to protect this right as it promotes individual freedom, innovation, and personal responsibility.

We cannot allow anyone to weaponize the government to force their will on others, as this violates our fundamental rights. It is unacceptable for anyone to take bribes or deals to infringe on an individual's freedom and autonomy. Those who engage in such behavior should be held accountable and prevented from having any government position again.

There are already laws in place aside from the U.S. Bill of Rights that protect us from the government or anyone else who would seek to violate our rights.

Since the Democrat and Republican ran government has repeatedly failed to use the Constitution to protect human beings' natural human rights, other laws were introduced, including the Civil Rights Acts, passed in 1866 and later on. They must be enforced immediately.

Any lawyer, judge, prosecuting attorney, etc., who laughs at these laws and refuses to enforce them must be removed from their position immediately and held accountable for the statutes they broke, just like any regular human being.

"It is unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory, or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to them by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of their having exercised the same)." Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights.

Title 18, U.S.C. Section 241 also states:

"Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death."

Title 18, Section 241 of the United States Code, commonly known as the "Conspiracy Against Rights" law, has a long history that predates the current version of the United States Code. The law has been revised and amended multiple times throughout history. The law's original version was enacted in 1866 as part of the Civil Rights Act 1866.

House Representative John A. Bingham of Ohio (R) introduced the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and stated in his speech to Congress:

"The proposition pending before the House is simply a proposition to arm the Congress of the United States, by the consent of the people of the United States, with the power to enforce the bill of rights as it stands in the Constitution today. It ''hath that extent—no more."

He dealt with opposition in Congress about this provision and held his ground:

"Gentlemen admit the force of the provisions in the bill of rights, that the citizens of the United States shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States in the several States, and that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; but they say, '"We are opposed to its enforcement by act of Congress under an amended Constitution, as proposed." That is the sum and substance of all the arguments that we have heard on this subject. Why are gentlemen opposed to the enforcement of the Bill of Rights, as proposed? Because they aver, it would interfere with the reserved rights of the States!

Who ever before heard that any State had reserved to itself the right, under the Constitution of the United States, to withhold from any citizen of the United States within its limits, under any pretext whatever, any of the privileges of a citizen of the United States, or to impose upon him, no matter from what State he may have come, any burden contrary to that provision of the Constitution which declares that the citizen shall be entitled in the several States to all the immunities of a citizen of the United States?

What does the word immunity in your Constitution mean? Exemption from unequal burdens. Ah! Say, gentlemen who oppose this amendment, we are not opposed to equal rights; we are not opposed to the bill of rights that all shall be protected alike in life, liberty, and property; we are only opposed to enforcing it by national authority, even by the consent of the loyal people of all the States."

He then goes into Congressman from Pennsylvania Mr. Randall's argument against the provision to enforce the Bill of Rights:

"And when the question was asked of one of the fathers of the Constitution, how can you break up the Confederation without the consent of all the States, and against the protest of some of them; how can you break the covenant ''of perpetual Union" under the Articles of Confederation? He gave for an answer that the right of the people to self-preservation justifies it; it rests upon the transcendent right of nature and nature's God.
That right is still in the people and has justified their actions through all this trial. It is the inherent right of the people. It cannot be taken from them. It has survived the storms and tempests of this great conflict of arms. Hence, if the gentleman's logic be true, that you cannot amend the Constitution without the assent of Representatives in Congress of the rebel States, you could not have passed any bill during all these four years of war if it affected in any sense the interests of the eleven rebel States."

John A. Bingham was dropping facts on these folks. You can read his entire speech here.

People must know these rights, their origins, and why they exist. Too many of us believe there is zero accountability for our corrupt government system today when that's simply false.

Do I personally think the State will hold itself accountable?

No, but we have the right to hold them responsible for conspiring against our liberties.

The last statute I will address, also derived from the Civil Rights Act of 1866, is Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law. Which states:

"It's a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of their color or race."

Title 18, Section 242 is a necessary provision that safeguards against abuses of power by individuals in positions of authority, such as law enforcement officers or public officials. It ensures that all individuals are entitled to equal protection under the law and that their constitutional and legal rights are respected.

It also reads:

"Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, State, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority, provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of their official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes, ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death."

Let's say, for example, that members of your state legislators introduce legislation that violates the Bill of Rights. Someone introduces the bill and gets co-sponsors to conspire to deprive you of your fundamental human rights. That's two or more people conspiring against your rights.

Then, when law enforcement, judges, and DA go along with it, they are also conspiring against your civil liberties. They are not supposed to enforce laws that violate the Bill of Rights.

No exceptions.

Every single day people in government positions violate those statutes. Did you notice that in both of those provisions, violators could be sentenced to DEATH! Of course, they will laugh at us for wanting to enforce the Bill of Rights and enjoy justice from our unjust system. They would all be behind bars, broke, and even put to death for what they have done to regular folks like us every day.

The laws are there. It's time for "we the people" to enforce them. We always have the inalienable right to alter, reform, or abolish our government however or whenever we see fit. We can start locally by eliminating the old corrupt practices of our current system.

It will take bringing awareness to our local communities that these laws exist and showing up to locations in mass numbers to show we're not playing our around. They never reached our consent to become our masters to rule over us, and people need to stand up and tell them NO. Have each other's backs instead of defending the tyrants that would not show you the same mercy.

Therefore, we must stand together and promote a society that values individual liberty while respecting the rule of natural human law. Let us not allow any individual or group to compromise the integrity of those selected to protect the rights of the people they are supposed to represent and defend. We must uphold these principles and protect our freedoms for generations, but that will never happen if people continue subjecting themselves to the system.

How do you get this done?

First, we must educate ourselves and our communities so we are locked and loaded to hold our tyrants accountable. What do after that?

We can discuss some ideas in the following upcoming discussions. Ensure you're signed up for the website to get everything before everyone else. It will take everyone we can in this movement for individual liberties to step up in their local areas to put the domino effect for freedom in motion.

It's up to US. No more comprises. It's Liberty Or Else.

Doni Anthony (Doni The Don)

Introducing Doni Anthony (Doni The Don), Founder of Liberty Or Else and a passionate advocate for individual liberties and natural human rights.

Join her engaging podcast, subscribe to her blog, and catch her inspiring speeches at public events. Support her work on Cash App or Venmo. Follow Doni on Facebook and Twitter for valuable insights and updates. #LibertyOrElse


bottom of page