![Matt Hamilton [Maryland]](https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/2324-48-20230922010214.webp){kind=small}
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
I had the opportunity to speak to a retired MD state attorney (prosecutor) a few days ago.
I asked him a question about consent of the governed and he told me to email him my questions instead.
Well I did, and unsurprisingly I haven't heard back.
And yeah, he's not going to answer my questions because to do so honestly would likely shatter his entire world view.
The questions included in the thread below.
Sexy Moon
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
1) Government derives authority from the consent of the governed. Do you believe that a Union (of States) can be held together involuntarily? If states express explicit non-consent, a desire to secede, and are subsequently met with violence (1861), does that government have authority by the consent of the governed? If so, by what measure is that consent determined?
1.1) What recourse do the people have to express non-consent?
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
7) Do you think that the government (Federal and State) valuing your time at $0/hr for the purposes of income tax is legitimate? The current definition of income tax, a tax on gains above and beyond what you previously, only makes logical sense in the current implementation if the government values your time and labor at $0, thus allowing governments to impose a tax on the entirety of pay received as a trade for labor. Is "income" defined statutorily differently than I've described?
Jezza™@threads.com (Official)
@eriner can you elucidate the argument / idea behind this question?
Sexy Moon
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
3) Congress passed the 18th amendment to prohibit manufacture, sale, and transportation of liquor, then repealed it with the 21st amendment. Today, the Federal government prohibits the manufacture, sale, and transportation of much more than just liquor (via Executive agency). Why didn't the Federal government establish Executive agencies to regulate arbitrary goods in 1919 like they do today?
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
4) Do you believe that Maryland juries should be (permitted to be) explicitly instructed about Jury nullification, as Article 23 of the Maryland Constitution would suggest?
(emphasis below is mine)
> Art. 23. In the trial of all criminal cases, __the Jury shall be the Judges of Law__, as well as of fact, except that the Court may pass upon the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction.
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
5) Other than double jeopardy, the state risks nothing when charging someone and bringing a case. This enables vexatious prosecution for which the defendant has no recourse. A potential solution to this problem is to require the government to ante and risk something when bringing charges (for example, pay the legal fees of the defendant's private legal representation). What are your thoughts on this, and can you think of other/better solutions to this problem?
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
6) Do you think legal tender laws in the US are constitutional?
Matt Hamilton [Maryland]
2) Do you believe that Marbury v Madison (1803) was correctly and legitimately decided? Do you believe an unelected oligopoly (the Supreme Court) has the bona fide Constitutional authority to legislate from the bench and impose their will over the entirety of the nation, beyond the parties named and present before the court?
2.1) Is there anything that prevents Congress from reducing the number of Supreme Court justices to a single appointee?
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.