Do You Understand Separation of Power’s?
The Powers of the three branches of government are established
in section 1 of each Article, I, II, and III of the Constitution.
Quite simply: “All legislative powers herein granted
shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…Senate and House of
Representatives; The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the
United States of America…; The Judicial Power of the United States shall be
vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts.”
I have not found an explicit declaration that the
branches may not intervene in the ‘business’ of the other branches. This is
because their duties are described implicitly (by terms that have universal
understanding—executive, legislative, judicial—with no overlap.
The current suit against the Colorado Department of
Corrections (CDOC) is claiming a violation of the separation of powers by a
legal mechanism called “quo warranto.” The central claim is that the department—an
executive branch agency—cannot repeal legislation; specifically Interstate
Corrections Compact (ICC). ICC is
statutory authority granted to the executive by the legislative, to contract
with other states to transfer inmates.
This contracting authority has to come from the legislature. Imagine if the governor had free reign to
enter the state into any contract!
The judicial branch, in turn, verifies the validity
and legal integrity of statutes, as well as hears cases of non-compliance with
statutes. The claim at issue is: Repeal of the Statute; by very intentional
ignorance of the statute.
The primary intention of the suit is to break the
obstruction prohibiting my application for transfer to Maine. The secondary intention is as a ‘stalking
horse’, to see if the Colorado Attorney General will argue for an executive
branch right to ignore statutes. They
will have to first argue that there is not a separation of powers issue…that
denial of the existence of a statute is not a repeal of statute…maybe just and
option to obey a statute, but not an obligation! I do hope they pursue this
optional statute argument, because it is a violation of the AG’s oath to the
People and proves the claim.
If the AG should argue for CDOC omnipotence…I
slipped in the power word because I’ve lived under their unchecked authority
for so long…; let’s euphemize that a little from omnipotence to…authority to
ignore statutes that may benefit inmate rehabilitation; I would ask who they
argue for. This is politically relevant,
more than legally relevant. The answer is Corrections Corporation of America—the
bête noire in the story.
This dovetails into the original piece I wanted to
write, questioning how “The People” came to be so misrepresented. It spawns the
foundational question of who our institutions are working for; the corporate
construct? Did we let it happen or are we victims? Answer: Mostly victims, the
authority was passed to the corporate construct away from public view and
input.
Can we recover out arrogated liberty? No. Revolution and reconstitution has become
the only option.
I’m going to leave it parenthetically pushed off the
cliff there—with revolution and reconstitution.
Any criminal defendant since Reagan, or maybe Bill Clinton’s AEDPA, can tell
you this is the path.
Keep an eye on Colorado Appellate Case, 16CA949.
It is my only hope to get back to Maine and make a
legal point about prison corruption.
Peace,
Jason
No comments:
Post a Comment