Back to search

Professor Toto - Teaches - "The Supreme Court is NOT SUPREME"

FHMI-0490Professor Toto2021-09-06Toto Teaching

N/A

None

Transcript

"democracy"(0 of 0)
Use arrow keys to move between matches

Showing 0 matches for "democracy" in the transcript below.

I'm Professor Toto with the conservative College I want to teach you today about the law of the land especially the misconception that many Americans have that federal law supersedes state law I'm sure you've heard of the law that Texas has recently passed to save unborn children from murderous parents passed this law and it is really stirred up the ey of all the liberal left and the reason it's done this is because they know the Liberals know that there is very little that they're going to be able to do here the handwriting is on the wall for liberalism and it's coming from the great state of Texas we also know that the State of Florida has stood in Defiance against the federal government South Dakota has done the same as well as my home state of Mississippi many of these states have taken a stand against federalism but most Americans believe that the Supreme Court is The Sovereign ruler of America this is normally the response you get from liberals is when they believe that ultimate authority over all other branches of government including over the states rest with the Supreme Court our Founders never intended for the judicial branch to be any more powerful than the legislative branch and indeed Texas has exercised it's legislative Authority but most Americans many of you watching me don't understand that beautiful balance between these branches of our government the Supreme Court is not over the legislatures of the state now here's the question when does federal law supersede state law when federal law is in compliance with the United States Constitution the law of the land but if the federal government if the Supreme Court rules and the state deems that that ruling is against the Constitution then in fact the state legislature has the power according in to federalism which is our form of government to raise their hand up and say thank you for the ruling but we will not comply that is basically what Texas has done so the question that we have to deal with is does Ro v Wade which is the abortion murder law does this Ro v Wade supersede Texas law does it supersede state law the only way that Ro v Wade will override state law is if in fact it lines up consistently with the Constitution but the problem with that is even pro-abortion pro-abortion those that love abortion legal Scholars they are aware and they have admitted that row lacks any legal Merit shortly after row was decided Progressive legal scholar John Eli he's not a conservative he's not a right-wing he's not a republican he's a progressive legal scholar he condemned the decision by the Supreme Court and here here's what he said because it is bad constitutional law or rather because it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be these Scholars know and so does the legislature in Texas that the roie Wade ruling has no constitutional Merit and the only time that federal law supersedes state law is when it's in compliance clearly with the United States Constitution let me explain the Constitution granted limited powers to the federal government mainly from article one and Section 8 it gives the federal government power over Commerce and defense that was the original reason for the creation of the federal government according to Article 1 Section 8 was to regulate commerce between these 50 Nations or 50 nation states or 50 states that was the power given to the federal government by Article 1 Section 8 now the 10th Amendment of the Constitution says that the powers not specifically delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively or to the people let me break that down for you in common language the Constitution speciic specifically give certain powers to the federal government and those that have not been given specifically to the federal government are reserved by the state and this is what you have seen Texas due in the last few days take the power that has been reserved for them to take because it is their belief that roie Wade is not a constit constitutional law and they take uh umbrage to it and now they Reserve their right as the legislative branch to defy the federal government roie Wade basically turned the 10th Amendment on its head as the Supreme Court struck down state laws that banned abortion on the basis that they violated the due process clause of the 14th Amendment so there were many states that were against abortion row sues the state and now the Supreme Court makes a ruling and they ruled that the due process clause of the 14th amendment was violated the Supreme Court had no other place in the Constitution no matter where they dug to find a constitutional right for murder of The Unborn so they dig through this mystery area and they say Well it violates the due process clause the due process clause was intended to refer to procedural due process meaning proper judicial procedure must be followed before infringing on an individual's rights in other words due process was never intended for the state legislators because indeed the state legislators give plenty of due process in the creating of their laws but they said that the legislature of the state did not give due process to their law that they created but what they don't understand due process was strictly for the judicial branch not the legislative branch yet the Court ruled in row that the 14th amendment guarantees a woman's right to privacy wow I sure wish they believe that about the vaccines don't you now remember roie Wade was one on the right to privacy however you're told you don't have that right to privacy anymore because of the vaccine you have to tell if you've had it and the states could not regulate abortion according to this ruling until after the first trimester of pregnancy the plain fact is that the constitution provides no right to abortion and no SU Supreme Court assertation will change that we have a situation here where the Supreme Court has usurped an authority over the states that it does not have why because the Constitution does not have something written in it that says a woman has a right to an abortion no they had to create that and try to insert it but just because they inserted it does not make it the Constitutional law that they claim that it is so Texas now has a right according to a federalist form of government to tell the Supreme Court we don't believe your assertation is Law and therefore we reserve the right to make the law for our own state Texas is a sovereign state it did not give up that sovereignty Congressional law and Supreme Court rulings are only Supreme in so far as they are in pursuance of the Constitution that is known as the supremacy clause according to the supremacy clause there is no Supreme you don't have a supreme court if that court has ruled outside of their Supremacy which is in agreement with the Constitution so if a Supreme Court ruling is in contradiction to the Constitution then states are obligated by the Constitution to ignore and obstruct that ruling that is known as the process of nullification or interposition you need to study those words a state can nullify a Supreme Court ruling that the legislative branch deems to be unconstitutional to do otherwise would be to substitute the rulings of the court for the Constitution I want you to hear that if you don't fight for your state right now we're replacing the law of the land as a ruling from the Supreme Court rather than the plain dictates of the Constitution a move that has and will continue to subvert our very system of government Texas is within their full rights Florida to to fight against the mask mandates are within their full rights America is a republic we are not a democracy perish the thought that we are a democracy we are a constitutional republic on the basis of federalism sovereign state rights that is the reason that even though there's a federal law against marijuana Colorado said so what we don't care because it's not in the Constitution so therefore our legislature will decide for our state the Texas legislature has decided for their state and congratulations to them on such a Godly law that they have passed I would love for you to join us on telegram we have a private group there the link is in the description box below and we want to thank every one of you for subscribing to our YouTube channel thank you very much for your support helping us get these lessons out that will educate this great Republic God bless you have a great day

Summary

In this lecture, Shane Vaughn explains his understanding of federalism and the relationship between state and federal authority under the U.S. Constitution. Using the recent Texas abortion law as his principal example, he argues that states retain sovereign powers under the Tenth Amendment and may reject federal actions they believe violate the Constitution. The presentation discusses Article I, Section 8, the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supremacy Clause, and the concepts of nullification and interposition while arguing that Roe v. Wade lacks constitutional legitimacy. The transcript contains no explicitly cited or clearly identifiable biblical Scripture references.

Core doctrine

None (Constitutional / Legal Commentary — No Biblical Doctrine Presented)

Source document

Original source document

This teaching is shown above as searchable text so readers can jump directly to matched words.

Open source