Taking Rights Seriously-Judge Andrew Napolitano
This excellent summary of the origin of private, unalienable rights ties together all the history and concepts on this site into a cohesive rule. What he calls “Positivism” we call “statutory”. What he calls “natural rights” we call “unalienable rights” generally or “constitutional rights” in relation to governments. Other than that, our vocabulary is the same.
“Unalienable” is meant to dispose of any notion that anyone has in any situation permanently sold away his rights or transferred them away. They are endowed by the Creator. So even if you are represented by an attorney, the attorney cannot invoke your right against self-incrimination FOR you–he can only advise you to do so. YOU must assert the right yourself because it is an unalienable right.
Note that he identifies “the right to be let alone” as the origin of all natural rights. We call that “justice“, but he doesn’t give it that name. But he does identify the source of the concept as Justice Brandeis of the U.S. Supreme Court, just like we do.
He also describes a “republican form of government” as constitutional law 101, which he defines as:
- Legislature popularly elected by the people.
- Separation of powers between the three branches. See Government Conspiracy to Destroy the Separation of Powers, Form #05.023
- Only the legislature can make law.
- Entity that ENACTS the law cannot be the same entity that ENFORCES the law. Meaning, that the Executive Branch can’t make law, like Governors have been unconstitutionally trying to do during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
As a former judge, he says that the courts are corrupt because they won’t declare what the governors are doing to make law during the COVID-19 pandemic. We agree.
For more on this subject, see: