Archives for Articles – Page 5

Mandatory Mask Rights Flyer For Individuals and Businesses

June 23, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

Mandatory Mask Rights Flyer For Individuals and Businesses

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

There is a growing trend of State and local governments violating the Rights of the people by mandating masks with criminal penalities. To help you manuever through these confusing and often overreaching laws, I have created two informational tools. These tools are designed so you can go into a business unmolested and run your businesses without violating federal laws or becoming a private police to enforce these draconian laws for the government.

Please feel free to reprint, share, and post them whereever and whenever you find appropriate. I have encoded no copyright and I do not expect any credit or compensation. I made these in the spirit of America’s foundation- so we can work together to ensure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves AND our Posterity.

If you are looking for more information, see The KrisAnne Hall Daily Journal podcast: Episode 1124 Mask Mandates and Free Speech

Blessings!

Individual Rights Flyer –

Print out several copies and keep them with you as you engage in commerce.

DOWNLOAD LINK

Poster for Business

Post on Entrance Doors & Windows

DOWNLOAD LINK

Poster for Hillsborough County, FL Business

Post on Entrance Doors & Windows

DOWNLOAD LINK

Model Open Letter/Editorial RE: Contact Tracing & the Supreme Court

May 27, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

The following is a sample editorial that I have drafted for you to use in your State regarding the two main methods of contact tracing being suggested for our local governments. I am publishing this letter for the sole purpose that others may copy and use it for their own benefit. You have my express permission to use this and submit it in your own name, without any credit to me whatsoever. Together we can restore Liberty! ~ KrisAnne Hall

Model Open Letter/Editorial RE: Contact Tracing & the Supreme Court

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

Download this letter as a .docx HERE

The people of (STATE) will be forced to pay enormous court fees and settlements if our counties continue with their proposed plans for COVID Contact Tracing.

I watch the county meetings because it is important to me to know what my government is doing with the COVID-19 situation. Recently, counties across (STATE) have been speaking to medical professionals and data scientists about Contact Tracing. The methods our counties propose to employ should be genuinely concerning to every taxpayer.

The main mechanism under consideration for Contact Tracing is to use cellphone GPS data to trace individuals and groups to a particular location. Data scientists are submitting reports to show how cell phone data monitoring would work to allow the government to track people through their cell phone GPS. These are not cell phones our governments will be tracking, they are people.

In addition to the cell phone tracking, our counties are also considering using infrared technology to “look” inside private homes and buildings to determine the number of people who are gathered. These infrared devices are so precise they can identify a single person in a home. This activity is more suitable to a George Orwell novel than for elected representatives tasked with protecting people’s rights.

Every data scientist must admit the data provided to our counties will contain specific, private, and personal information. Once provided, it will be completely up to the county officials, through their policies, to determine how much of that information they will use and how our personal information will be stored. I am personally not comforted by the thought that our counties will determine the limits to their own authority over our personal and private information.

If this sounds disturbing to you, it should. The good news is that the Supreme Court of the United States agrees with us. The use of cell phones by government entities to geo track people is not a new nor an unsettled issue. Although it may be legal for a hospital or university to purchase such data from a cell phone provider for research purposes, it is NOT lawful for the government to use the data from data scientists to track individuals without a warrant – even though that data comes from a third party. In Carpenter v. U.S., the Supreme Court held that a government entity MUST have a warrant to use cell data to geo track someone, even when that data comes from a third party.

Additionally, the Supreme Court held in Kyllo v U.S. that a government entity must have a warrant to use infrared technology to look inside a private building and to do so without a warrant is a violation of our rights to privacy.

For government officers to use cell data or infrared technology to track people, they must have either express permission from each person or a warrant for every single individual or that tracking will be an unlawful search and seizure. If our officials use this technology for contact tracing without warrants, regardless of where the data comes from, it will be tantamount to legal negligence. Given the recency of these Supreme Court cases it is highly likely that the counties would lose a civil rights challenge and the taxpayers will foot the bill.

The taxpayers of (STATE) should not be forced to waste precious tax dollars to defend their county’s actions when those actions are so clearly established to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. Our elected representatives ought to have a greater respect for the privacy and civil rights of the people. The people of (STATE) must demand our counties refuse to use this technology for any form of COVID Contact Tracing and spare the taxpayers from paying for the inevitable lawsuits.

Open Letter From Sheriff Mike Herrington to the State of New Mexico

May 26, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

I am posting this open letter published by Sheriff Mike Herrington, Chaves County, NM because it beautifully and succinctly describes the role and duty of the Sheriff, not only during COVID but all the time. It is my desire that we share this letter as a way to educate others and ensure that our Sheriff’s understand that it is their duty to protect our Rights, whether it be from criminals or an overreaching government. ~ KrisAnne Hall, JD

Posted by Sheriff Mike Herrington

Duty as Sheriff per the Constitution

May 9, 2020

Linked on Facebook Here: https://www.facebook.com/chavescountysheriffnm

Since before the birth of America the duty of the Sheriff has been to secure the Rights of the People. This is evidenced by the Sheriff’s oath of Office as a promise to the people, to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Mexico and defend them (these Rights of the People) against all enemies whatsoever.

The New Mexico Bill of Rights enshrines to every citizen of New Mexico the Right that all persons are born equally free, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, among which are the rights of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and of seeking and obtaining safety and happiness; that No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law; private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation.

Every business in Chavez County is essential when the people are dependent upon that income to provide for themselves and their families. It is not the job of government to provide income to the people and New Mexico was built upon the principles of private property ownership, hard work, and self-reliance. To say otherwise is simply ridiculous.

As a Constitutional Officer it is my duty and obligation to defend the Rights of the people against every and all infringements.

The New Mexico Constitution establishes a strict separation of power to ensure the security of the rights of the people and that “The powers of the government of this state are divided into three distinct departments, the legislative, executive and judicial, and no person or collection of persons charged with the exercise of powers properly belonging to one of these departments, shall exercise any powers properly belonging to either of the others…” Furthermore the New Mexico Constitution delegates to the Legislative branch alone full legislative power. For the Governor to issues Orders with the expectation that they be enforced upon the people is in direct conflict with the Constitution of the State of New Mexico and the most violent defiance of the essential principle of separation of powers.

As a Constitutional Officer it is my duty and obligation to defend the Constitution of the State of New Mexico against all violations and abuses of power.

The Sheriff is not a hireling of the State. We do not work for the Governor or the County and we are not beholden to any one person for a paycheck. We are direct Constitutional representatives of the people, we work for the People, and therefore are the highest law enforcement authority in our County. All other law enforcement in the State is subject to the authority of the Sheriff within their county. That authority demands the highest respect for the Constitution and the Rights of the people; to which I intend to defend.

The question here today is whether we overturn 244 years of history and duty of the Sheriff for a new and radical ideology that replaces the duty of the Sheriff to protect the rights of the people and the Constitution of New Mexico with an unconstitutional and unchecked power exercised by a Governor that looks more like a monarch than a servant of the people. I will not stand idly by and watch the lives, liberties, and Rights of the people of Chavez County of New Mexico violated by unconstitutional and unjust pretended authorities.

Learn more about the duty and role of the Constitutional Sheriff through KrisAnne’s book Sovereign Duty available here or at Amazon

State Attorney admits that coercion and intimidation are his “North Star”

May 15, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

State Attorney admits that coercion and intimidation are his “North Star”

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

On March 30, 2020, Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne of River Ministries International was arrested for allegedly holding church services contrary to the Hillsborough County, Florida “Safer at Home” order. In spite of the fact that the church observed social distancing and proper sanitary practices, above and beyond the local Wal-Mart, Sheriff Chad Chronister arrested Pastor Howard-Browne contrary to the rights enshrined in both the US and Florida Constitutions. Shortly after that arrest, State Attorney Andrew Warren filed criminal charges against Pastor Howard-Browne alleging two misdemeanor violations punishable up to a year in the county jail and a thousand dollar fine.

On May 15, 2020 Warren decided drop the charges against Pastor Howard-Browne and filed a Notice to Of Termination of Prosecution to the Clerk of the Court.

In an article for the Tampa Bay Times, Florida State Attorney Andrew Warren said,

“In deciding whether to criminally prosecute violations of stay-at-home orders, compliance is our North Star.”

So according to Warren, the goal of the prosecutor is to make people obey.

When Government can suppress individual speech or conduct through fear, the people will silence themselves out of apprehension of an unchecked force. State Attorney Warren’s policy is the very definition of the chilling effect our judicial system has condemned for over a century.

When a prosecutor can bring charges against someone contrary to our Rights and then sidestep accountability by later dropping those charges, the process becomes the punishment. Due process is obliterated.

This is not the “North Star” of America’s legal system. Our North Star is that the belief that people have certain unalienable rights and the sole purpose of government is to secure those rights. A just government does not use the system as a bludgeon to enforce the whimsical orders of the day. The goal of the prosecutor is to be a defender of the facts not a plantation foreman whose job is to whip the population into compliance.

Email/Phone Strategy for Ending Stay At Home Orders

May 6, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

Email/Phone Strategy for Ending Stay At Home Orders

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

Download the email campaign as a .pdf

The key to a successful petition is persistence. You don’t need a million signatures if a hundred people will make a thousand emails and phone calls. If it is worth contacting your representative once, it is worth contacting your representative once a day until you see satisfactory results. Its just not enough to add your name to an online petition that will be sent off into digital oblivion.

The First Amendment reads:

the Right of the People…to Petition the government for a redress of grievances. The key to this right is not “petition.” The key to this right is “redress.” This is not simply an expression of our right to complain to or about our government. It is about our right to complain and to see those complaints satisfied.

This Right of petition is deeply rooted in history and can be traced back to clause 61 of the Magna Carta. In this promise by the King to the people, clause 61 declares that when the king or “our chief justice, our officials, or any of our servants offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the articles of the peace or of this security” it becomes the Right of the People to “distrain upon and assail us in every way possible, with the support of the whole community of the land, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, or anything else saving only our own person and those of the queen and our children, until they have secured such redress as they have determined upon.“

A one time or general email or phone call is merely a request and has very little influence or authority. A persistent and pointed request is powerful and demands remedy. That is how you make changes in a Representative form of government.

Here is an email/phone campaign I designed to guide you in a successfully persistent and pointed redress of your grievances over the current stay at home orders. If you unite the people in your community to send these emails repeatedly over a period of a few weeks, you will see changes. There are three different emails and two different phone message. Use them all.

Once you get the hang of it you can design your own campaign. Perhaps you have a Sheriff that needs to understand his/her duty to defend the rights of the people over simply “enforcing the law.” Maybe you have a school board that is more occupied with getting money from the government and teaching historical error than truly educating children. I cannot stress enough how important regular engagement is to have a healthy and liberty minded government. We must make contact often and regularly. WE MUST BE THE LOBBYISTS FOR LIBERTY.

“Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.” Thomas Jefferson, 1787

Translation: I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.

Liberty is not easy, but it is worth the sacrifice and time to know your children and grandchildren will have the opportunity to be free.

Download the email campaign as a .pdf

Email Message #1

Dear (Governor/Commissioner),

America was founded upon the principle that all people are endowed with certain Inherent and Inalienable Rights. The people of (Insert State/County) have acted responsibly; we have acted in love and regard for our people, and our declining COVID infection rate reflects that fact. Now it is time to let the people of (Insert State/County) do what they do best; get back to work.

The current (Insert State/County) Order related to the COVID-19 Emergency establishes restrictions upon the people in direct contradiction of our fundamental Rights and the Supreme Law of this State. The limit upon our assembly, the exercise of our freedom of religion, our right to assemble for a redress of our grievances are all being infringed. Our Right to the ownership, control, and enjoyment of our property is not only being violated without due process and just compensation, but in many cases these Rights may be forever lost.

Every business is essential when a family’s provisions are dependent upon that income. Current statistics show us that divorce, child abuse, alcohol abuse and depression are on the rise because of our inability to legally work and provide for our needs. The people of (Insert State/County) are responsible and honorable people. We do not want handouts, and it’s time to start lifting the restrictions upon our businesses so the people of (Insert State/County) can get back to healthy and productive lives.

It is time to honor our most sacred principles of government; it is the duty of the (Insert State/County) to secure the Rights of the people, not infringe upon them. We are fully capable of operating our businesses while voluntarily engaging in the practices that will help keep our neighbors healthy.

It is time to put (Insert State/County) BACK TO WORK.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Sign you name, Your email, Your phone number

Phone Call Message #1:

I am calling to say it is time to begin opening (Insert State/County) businesses, now. The limits upon our assembly, the exercise of our freedom of religion, our right to assemble for a redress of our grievances are all being infringed. Our Right to the ownership, control, and enjoyment of our property is not only being violated without due process and just compensation, but in many cases these Rights may be forever lost.

We have acted responsibly; we have acted in love and regard for our people and our declining COVID infection rate reflects that fact. We don’t want government handouts. We want to work and provide for ourselves, as free people do. Now it is time to let the people of (Insert State/County) do what they do best; get back to work. Thank you!

Email Message #2:

Dear (Governor/Commissioner),

(Insert State/County) was built upon hard work and self-sufficiency. We are a resourceful and responsible people. It is time to let the people of (Insert State/County) do what we do best; get back to work.

Every business is essential when a family’s provisions are dependent upon that income. Current statistics show us that divorce, child abuse, alcohol abuse and depression are on the rise as a result of our inability to legally work and provide for our needs. It is time to begin lifting the restrictions upon our businesses so we can get back to healthy and productive lives.

The people of (Insert State/County) know how to use common sense to live and work safely. Lift the Safer at Home penalties while maintaining the recommendations of the CDC so that we can provide for our families. We are good people. We are fully capable of operating our businesses while voluntarily engaging in the practices that will help keep our neighbors healthy.

It is time to put (Insert State/County) BACK TO WORK. It is time to begin lifting the restrictions established under our (Insert State/County) Safer At Home Order. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Sign you name, Your email, Your phone number

Phone Call Message #2:

I am calling to say I want the (Insert State/County) Safer At Home Order lifted. The people of (Insert State/County) don’t need to be dependent on government handouts, we need to get back to work. We love our neighbors and know how to use common sense to live and work safely and our declining COVID numbers prove that. (Insert State/County) can lift the Stay At Home Order and still keep the CDC Recommendations. Let us get BACK TO WORK.

Thank you.

Email Message #3

Dear (Governor/Commissioner)

I am writing to say I want the (Insert State/County) Safer At Home Order lifted. The people of (Insert State/County) don’t need to be dependent on government handouts, we need to get back to work. Every business is essential when a family’s provisions are dependent upon that income. Our communities are seeing divorce, child abuse, alcohol abuse and depression are on the rise because we are not able to legally work and provide for our needs. It is time to repeal the restrictions upon our businesses so we can get back to healthy and productive lives.

We love our neighbors and know how to use common sense to live and work safely. (Insert State/County) can lift the Stay At Home Order and still keep the CDC Recommendations. We know how to use common sense to live and work safely. It is time NOW, not later.

It is time for the people of (Insert State/County) to get back to work.
It is time to open our parks and beaches.
It is time to begin opening our businesses.
It is time to remove the (Insert State/County) Safer at Home Order.

Let the people of (Insert State/County) get BACK TO WORK. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Sign you name, Your email, Your phone number

Phone Call Message #3:

Thank you.

A Vision of America in 2021

April 9, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

This is guest article by the beautiful Amy Manley; a 19 year old brilliant young lady who just happens to have been homeschooled and also educated through our Liberty First Society Teaching. I pray this article touches you as much as it touched me. If we do not learn from our history, if we do not hold tight to our Constitution, if we do not defend our Liberty, Amy says, this could be…

A Vision of America in 2021

by Amy Manley

It’s the 4th of July. We have banners hanging, fireworks set to go off, hot dogs and burgers roasting on the fire, and corn and salad ready. Friends will be coming over. The banners that we have flying are inside our house. We can’t hang them outside, but still they look pretty. The burgers and hot dogs are being roasted inside on the oven, because we can’t have an outdoor fire. The police will be here too, but they shouldn’t keep us from celebrating. We get to sing a song with our friends while they sit in their cars. It is a new one. The government wrote it for us. We can’t sing any of the old ones. We were going to read the constitution… or the opening lines of it, like we do every year, but we can’t. Not if the police are present. Maybe when they leave we can try and sneak it in there.

It is so nice to be able to celebrate our freedom. Everyone arrives. We wave at them from our front door. The police get out and are standing between the cars. They are nice men. They offer to help with the fireworks. We can’t tell them no. They say we can only set off 4 of them because of the toxins they release in the air. The same reason we can’t have an outdoor fire. They say it is for our safety that they are there. I believe them. It is nice to have the government looking out for us. We only have a few hot dogs and burgers because that is the only amount we were allowed to buy at the store. We don’t have any buns because the manager at the store said the government stopped allowing breads to be sold. We tried to make our own, but we were found out. We got punished. The police came and destroyed our garden. But they gave us money to buy food. I am glad we have the freedom to buy food with their money. Our friends are not allowed to get out of their cars, but we say hi to them from our door. One of them tries to read out of the Bible, something about our freedom in Christ. The police officer smashes the window of their car, and they are taken away. At least I have memorized some of the Bible so I can think about it in my head. They should have known better.
We are not afraid of the government, we just know they want what’s best for us. To keep us safe. It is 2021. I am glad we live in such free times.

History repeats itself.
It is the year 2020.
I think of the Israelites. They begged God for a king. God gave them a ruler. They became slaves in Egypt. It was nice there. They had food to eat. They had places to live. They had to work, but at least they had work. Others didn’t. They could get married, have kids, laugh and smile. But they were slaves, but they celebrated the freedom they had. And Yet, because they were slaves, they were told to do what was against God’s Law. They were commanded to build idols and worship god’s that were false. They had a King, but now they had a great separation from God. Because they were in bondage to a King who was against God. Even when a deliverer came, they got mad at him. They said it was better before he came. (Before freedom comes, it will get harder than it is now.) But Through one man’s obedience a nation was freed. They didn’t think life was so bad. They didn’t see their need for freedom. They cried out because of pain, but did not want to pay what freedom cost. So they stayed a slave. God has given us freedom. Freedom to worship Him. He has given us free will to choose Him, or not to. Evil will fight until death to rule the Children of God, will the Children of God fight UNTIL DEATH to be Ruled by their True King?

You may think it is a sin to fight. To go against the rulers set in place. BUT I THINK IT IS A SIN TO STAND BY AND ALLOW EVIL TO BRING YOU INTO BONDAGE UNDER ITSELF. IF WE STAND BY AND LET THE EVIL LIVE AMONG US, THEN WE ARE BECOMING THE EVIL ITSELF.

I think of Noah now. The world seems so similar to those times when he lived on the earth. Sin runs rampant. Evil has soaked it’s ugly fingers into the dirt we live on and has begun to devour anything in sight. Why does God not stop it? How can we fight for what is true when others just stand by and watch.

I think of Esther now. A whole nation was going to be killed. Esther was called because of her heart.

I think of myself. I think of how little I am. How I can do nothing. How I feel as if the world will become corrupted and evil as I sit here and fight a losing battle.

Then I think again…

Moses (one man with a pure, righteous, godly heart) led a nation to freedom, whether that nation knew they needed freedom or not. He obeyed God and God changed the world through that one man.

Noah (one man with a pure, righteous, godly heart.) led his family, and the rest of the world to freedom from the sin in the old world, whether they knew they needed it or not. He obeyed God and God changed the world through one man.

Esther (one woman with a pure, righteous, godly heart) saved a whole nation and led them to freedom from death, whether they knew of her or not. She obeyed God and God changed the world through one woman.

God is not looking for bloodthirsty men and women. He is looking for righteousness. His eyes roam through the world looking for those who are committed to Him (2 Chron 16:9) Righteousness. Purity. Godliness. A heart that will obey His commands as soon as they exit His mouth. He is looking for the righteous YOU.
History repeats itself. Are you going to be the ONE. The one who stands alone honoring God in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation? Are you going to be the one who obeys God in the quiet of the morning, or the battlefield for freedom?

Will you be the next ONE. Though none go with me, still I will Follow.

Shelter in Place Orders – Things of Kings

March 30, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

Shelter in Place Orders- Things of Kings

By KrisAnne Hall, JD

The current application of State and local authority to mandate the closure of businesses and require the people to restrict their activities to a list of government approved venues under the threat of force and punishment, is antithetical to everything America was built upon. These orders are arbitrary, deny due process, and are rife with unbridled discretion.

Arbitrariness is the quality of being “determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle.” A shelter in place order that requires places of worship to close, where a finite number of people attend for less than a few hours once a week, but then claims that Wal-Mart and liquor stores, where a limitless number of people come and go every day, all day may remain open, is completely arbitrary. Where is the science, where is the reason that says that people sitting in a church are more susceptible to a virus than those who go to Walmart or the liquor store? The answer is simple, it doesn’t exist. The decision to close the church, a shoe store, or private vacation rental property, and not Walmart is based upon a whim and an impulse, not facts or reason. By legal standard a government’s actions are arbitrary and capricious when they are founded upon unreasonable grounds or made with without any proper consideration of circumstances, deny due process and prejudice substantial rights. Therefore, the government’s exercise of authority in these Shelter In Place Orders to pick and choose which businesses can stay open and which cannot is by definition arbitrary and capricious.

A government’s arbitrary determination on which businesses can stay open and which ones cannot is tantamount to a regulatory taking. There is no warrant issued for the seizure of this property. No mechanism for the business owner to challenge the government’s arbitrary determination to close their business. When the government threatens a business owner or forcibly demands that business close, the business owner is being effectively deprived of the economic value of its property and the principal private use of that property. Whenever a government takes private property for public purpose, both State and US Constitutions require that business receive proper due process consideration followed by just compensation equaling a fair market value for that property. These Shelter In Place orders neither secure due process nor do they even mention reimbursement of fair market value.

Learn YOUR Constitution at LibertyFirstSociety.com – The Constitution as if the founders themselves were teaching it. An education worthy of the highestest institutions of learning because they won’t teach truth anymore!

Every Constitution of every State in the Union, as well as the US Constitution, acknowledge the Rights to freedom of religion and to peaceably assemble as fundamental rights. Many State Constitutions, as well as the US Constitution, describe these rights as “inalienable rights” or “Natural Rights” meaning they do not come as permissions from governments, but pre-exist all law and government. These Rights are not the products of governments. To the contrary, governments exist with sole purpose to secure these rights for the individual. Inherent in the securing of these rights is the prohibition against government defining the parameters of these rights. When the government can arbitrarily decide that the only “legal” assembly is one of ten people or less, there is no longer a right to peaceably assemble, but a permission granted under certain limited and confining terms. One of the most essential reasons for the right to peaceably assemble is the power the assembly brings in the Right to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances. It is a truly despotic government that can create unjust and unconstitutional activity and then also possess the power to set the limits and parameters upon which the people can protest those laws. The very same can be said about the Right to freedom of religion. When a government can tell a body of people when, where, and how many can “legally” meet in their church, that government is defining religion and that is antithetical to everything that America is founded upon. What is even worse, these Shelter in Place Orders not only do all of that, many have also determined that the definition of freedom of religion can be relegated and confined to an internet broadcast and all those who are unable to meet this order are simply denied their right to worship and threatened by force of government to have no assembly whatsoever.

Finally, these Shelter In Place Orders often establish that failure to comply with the order will result in civil or criminal penalties. Yet these orders do not define the elements of their newly invented crime, the evidence necessary to prove violation of the order, nor do they establish the affirmative defenses available to the accused. In their attempts to “ensure enforcement” of their orders, those governments have established those terms with a complete disregard for due process, evidentiary rules, and the Rights of the people to be innocent until proven guilty. As these orders stand, it is up to the individual officer to make the determination of what is proper evidence of compliance and what is insufficient evidence that equates to a violation: American courts call that “unbridled discretion” and for decades have held that to be fundamentally unjust.

What makes all of this so very tragic is that America’s founders pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to throw off the very artifices of government we are experiencing today. James Otis, Jr, a lawyer whom our founders termed as the “midwife to liberty,” brought a valiant legal battle against the laws of Parliament that attempted to legally authorize what our governors, county commissioners, city councils, and mayors are doing today. He referred to these laws as “the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty and the fundamental principles of law, that ever was found in an English law-book.” In an America that once declared independence from Kings forever, we have all too quickly succumbed to king-like authority under the wiles of fear and necessity. William Pitt, the Younger would likely remind us that “necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.”

Let’s be clear, I am not asserting that the individual should not choose a behavior that respects the most prudent measures available to ensure the best health and welfare of their neighbor. But when a government uses threat and force to compel behavior and the Rights of the people are ignored and due process denied under the pretense of necessity, the people are not safe, the welfare of the people is not respected and the body of the people are in danger of becoming enslaved by the very government they’ve elected to secure their rights. Samuel Adams said:

“No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved.”

At stake are the inherent rights to Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Freed of Press, Right to Peaceably Assemble, Right to Petition Government For a Redress of Grievances, Rights of Due Process, and Security in Personal Property. These rights are simply summarized as The Natural Rights of every individual and are derived from the First Law of Nature.

“Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.” Samuel Adams, 1772

America was not constructed upon the principle of National Security or power of National Emergency; America was built upon the Principle of Liberty. Our founders understood the eternal and essential nature of the principles of Liberty and believed that the preservation of these Rights was more important that life itself.

“Liberty must at all hazards be supported…” John Adams, 1765

“What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” Patrick Henry, 1775

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Benjamin Franklin, 1755

Perhaps it is time we begin to educate ourselves on the Constitutional Republic we legally have and the principles that truly make America great, instead of tolerating the authoritarian government we are being subjected to.

A Refuge in A Time of Need

March 22, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

The following is are the summary key points that follow from my previous publication A Message To The Church: COVID19 Restrictions and Freedom of Religion. For the full document please visit https://bit.ly/CovidReligiousLiberty

The Church: A Refuge in A Time of Need

Throughout all of history the church has been an essential part of society.
Throughout American culture and tradition the church house was not just the place for spiritual gatherings but the hub of society.
In American settlements the churches were often the very first buildings to be built in a community.
Churches have been, for generations, the common meeting place where the local community received key information about cultural and political events, and even world affairs.
The Church is a place where people turn for help and for comfort in a climate of fear and uncertainty.
Even people who do not attend church regularly, or perhaps never go to church, commonly view the church as somewhere for them to go when they need help.
Throughout history the church has been viewed as an essential part of society, a refuge in time of trouble or need, a place of peace and a sanctuary for the weary, even a place of healing and provision.
Because of the historical and cultural role of churches in American history, the church house is the perfect place for a safe haven to be established in this current time of need.
Not only are churches culturally viewed as a place of refuge:
- The facilities of the church are designed to accommodate large groups of people in need of assistance, shelter, and nourishment.
- The people of the church are trained to facilitate large gatherings of people
- The body of the church is practiced in the function of efficiently and equitably distributing aid
- Churches are established throughout communities and can easily become coordination centers to aid in crisis recovery
- Many churches already have established ministries that are already established distribution centers for clothing or bulk food items, a shelter, a childcare center, a communication center, or an information center for other organizations.
Churches make the perfect place for information staging areas for volunteers or work units and often provide their own ready pool of volunteers; providing transportation, assistance for services needed, and certain staff and members are already trained to provide counseling and assistance for special needs.
Because of the nature of the church as a body of those in service to others, the church can also serve as a training ground for those who wish to volunteer but have no previous experience in that service.
The church is not only historically a place of spiritual deliverance but an essential part of the organization of society and its physical preservation.
The church may not be the only place where people can gather, but it is traditionally one of the first places people turn to for help and one of the few places where many feel free to receive the help they need.

Churches provide ESSENTIAL SERVICES to the local community and are part of the CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. At times of crisis THE CHURCH in coordination with other private sector organizations serve as a force multiplier to the local government in providing multiple essential services when other services reach max capacity. I encourage every pastor, leader and American patriot to understand and articulate this message so ALL will remember that WE THE PEOPLE ARE UNITED.

Fighting the Invisible Enemy

March 22, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

Fighting the Invisible Enemy

By KrisAnne Hall, JD

How much thought does the average American put into their Rights on a daily basis? Perhaps not much, but that is all about to change. For generations the Supreme Court has called protection of the individual’s rights the bedrock of American principles. Those who ratified our Bill of Rights knew how vital these rights were to the very preservation of all liberty. Among these rights are those that our founders would formally declare as being absolutely essential to life itself; freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, along with the individual right to keep and bear arms, security of personal property, and indispensable rights of due process. Today these rights are at risk from an “invisible enemy.”

In 1788, the State of Virginia was refusing to ratify the Constitution without greater safeguards for these individual rights. In that same year, Richard Henry Lee, Congressman from Virginia, described our Bill of Rights, the enumeration of rights of the individual in our Constitution, as:

“visible boundaries, constantly seen by all, and any transgression of them is immediately discovered: they serve as centinels for the people at all times, and especially in those unavoidable intervals of inattention.” (sic)

Unfortunately, we have entered into that “interval of inattention” as very few Americans can name all five liberties identified in the First Amendment; national polls put the number at less than 2%. If we do not know what our Rights are, how do we know they are not already gone? How will we know when people in power, either through good or malicious intent, move against our Rights; we cannot defend what we cannot define.

Our founders lived in the midst of the greatest tyranny America has ever known. It was wrecking their churches, destroying their businesses, and tearing apart families and homes. Even in their day of limited technology they knew who the enemy was; not a King, not a country, not even a virus. The understood the enemy to be anything that jeopardized the inherent and individual rights of the people. They knew from personal experience that when essential liberties of the people are even partially limited by government force, they are never truly restored. Our founders spoke incessantly of the importance of fully securing our individual rights.

“Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it derived from our Maker.” (sic) John Adams 1765

“No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved.” (sic) Samuel Adams 1775

“Give me Liberty or give me death.” Patrick Henry 1775

Those who fought to secure our liberties today were firmly educated and intimately associated with their Rights and could easily identify their violations. Today our dearth of education in American history is only surpassed by the misinformation we are fed about the purpose and power of government. How easily this designed ignorance makes us fall prey to the undying argument that its necessary to “temporarily suspend” our Rights for some new and frightening boogey man.

Perhaps today we are being presented with the ultimate power poltergeist: an “invisible enemy” that can only be seen by those in government. Because of a virus, that has no face and no foreseeable end, we are told that it is necessary to temporarily suspend our rights for the safety of the community. However, all of history screams out to us in horror, “Rights are NEVER suspended temporarily, and safety is a ravenous phantom that can never be satisfied. Once your rights are surrendered, they are never peacefully restored.”

The mantra, “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one” is a Marxist principle not just a line from Star Trek dialogue. This ideology is not what America was founded upon, quite the opposite. Our governments, since the foundation of our States in 1776 are based upon the fundamental principle that the sole purpose of government is the secure the Rights of the INDIVIDUAL, not to appease the collective. The cornerstone of American government is the responsibility of the people to self-govern. It is not selfish for a person to demand full protection and security of their individual rights to freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and property. On the contrary, it is wholly selfish for the community to demand that the force of government deprive individual rights because there are a few who refuse to act responsibly in securing their own health and welfare. Mass curfews and quarantines are not the American way, they are the communist way. The American way says that we do not use force to compensate for the irresponsibility of the few.

Our State Constitutions and the Constitution of these United States were established as written standards to protect the individual from the will of the majority, to secure the rights of the minority. Ironically the needs of the many argument used today to justify a cry for national curfews, business closure, and forced quarantine, justified by the needs of the many, is the same argument used throughout history to justify slavery and the involuntary and indefinite incarceration of innocent people, even in America’s history. If residents wish to voluntarily follow guidelines and act responsibly, then so be it. But when business owners, Pastors of churches, and Sheriffs’ defending rights, refuse to obey any of these unconstitutional mandates, they are not acting lawlessly because it is actually those in government who are violating the Supreme Law of the land. These individuals are enforcing the law in the face of lawless government.

Our founders had very strong words for those in power who attempted to interfere with these inherent and essential rights. Benjamin Franklin, writing under the pseudonym of Silence Dogood wrote in 1722 that only “Publick Traytors” (sic) would attempt to subdue these Rights. He also remarked that when a person cannot freely express these Rights they live in a “wretched country” where he has no property rights.

In 1774 Thomas Gage, Governor of the colony of Massachusetts, issued a law outlawing all public meetings except one a year, but only when proper permit was obtained from Gage. Those who would write our First Amendment classified Gage’s actions as an act of war against the people. As soon as Gage issued his order 300 people assembled in Salem to protest the limit on their freedom of speech & assembly. Gage would send troops to disband the protest only to see an additional 3,000 people immediately assemble and chase his troops away. Thomas Jefferson issued instructions to the Virginia Congress in which he declared Gage’s law as an act of “Treason” and “the most alarming Process that ever appeared in a British Government.”

Now more than ever we must hold tight to the principles that founded America. Through the full application of true America principles, we can defeat any enemy while simultaneously securing the individual liberties of the people. We are about to travel a road our founders traveled, so let us pick up the wisdom of experience and move in the proper direction. Samuel Adams said,

“Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude and perseverance. Let us remember that “if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom,” it is a very serious consideration … that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event.”

What we do, what we allow those in government to do over the next few weeks, will determine the future fate of people in America and around the world. We cannot give into the “invisible enemy” and their siren song of the “necessity” which sets a precedent for our inherent rights to be brushed aside so easily. William Pitt The Younger gives this wisdom to our generation:

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” 1787

When facing an alleged threat today, we must pause to ask, “will this make it easier for our essential rights to be dismissed tomorrow?” Are building a future where are descendants view that which is fundamental as something granted and taken at the whim of rulers and masters? Didn’t we found this Constitutional Republic to escape that very scenario? Will a viral threat change our identity and have us cease to be America? What we do in the next few weeks will inevitably answer these questions.

Learn YOUR Constitution at LibertyFirst Society .com – The Constitution as if the founders themselves were teaching it. An education worthy of the highestest institutions of learning because they won’t teach truth anymore!

A Message To The Church: COVID19 Restrictions and Freedom of Religion

March 21, 2020/in Archives for Articles/by kahalladminnew

A Message To The Church:

COVID19 Restrictions and Freedom of Religion

By KrisAnne Hall, JD

KrisAnneHall.com

A bloody path was trod to bring religious freedom to modern America. Christian martyrs and patriots secured our God-given right to Freedom of Religion with their suffering and even with their lives. Religious freedom in America is not simply a fundamental right but a foundational one. The settlements of the first American colonies were established in the flight from oppressive religious persecution and the struggle continued even on these shores. From the beating of Obadiah Holmes, the lynching of Quakers and the imprisonment of 50 Baptist preachers who were defended by a fiery attorney named Patrick Henry, religious liberty in America has been something Christians have always been willing to stand for or even to die for. This history and more gave us our First Amendment to the Constitution and its underlying principle of religious conscience which has been part of the bedrock of our Republic for more than two centuries.

The “Father of the Constitution” and fourth President James Madison wrote in 1792,

“Conscience is the most sacred of all property…the exercise of that, being a natural and unalienable right. To guard a man’s house as his castle, to pay public and enforce private debts with the most exact faith, can give no title to invade a man’s conscience which is more sacred than his castle…”

Indeed prohibitions upon the government’s authority to infringe, limit, or dictate the operation of the church have been codified in western law long before the settlement of American colonies. Many American Christians have heard of Thomas Jefferson’s famous letter to the Danbury Baptists ensuring them that America would never return to a time where the government sought to dictate the operations of the church. But long before 1802, Jefferson’s “wall of separation of church and state” that kept government outside the sacred walls of the church was one alluded to by King Henry I in the 1100 Charter of Liberties. Henry declared the body of the church to be free from government intrusions. Two-hundred years later, one of the tipping points in the fight that brought us Magna Carta was the crown’s attempt to interfere in the free operation of the church. This charter history of our founding documents continued its development through the Grand Remonstrance of 1641 and the English Bill of Rights of 1689 under which our founders arrived in this New World. Each of these installments, which would later culminate in our founding documents; all happened amid the fight for religious liberty.

Learn YOUR Constitution at LibertyFirstSociety.com– The Constitution as if the founders themselves were teaching it. An education worthy of the highestest institutions of learning because they won’t teach truth anymore!

However even with the clear language of our First Amendment and the history that should inform our actions, the struggle to maintain this essential right from the control of government continues to this day. Modern lawmakers like to carve out excuses and causes for government intrusions into our inherent rights when some imagined need arises. William Pitt, The Younger warned in 1783, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.” Necessity seems to always be the most powerful tool to persuade the masses into accepting these infringements. Today because of the coronavirus scare, religious liberty is facing a huge “necessity plea” in the form of limits upon assembly. At least one church has been descended upon by police and threatened with the National Guard for having more than 250 people attend.

According to the courts, a law that infringes upon a fundamental right, like Freedom of Religion, must overcome certain challenges: The law must not be arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable. The law must be equally applied to secular businesses and it must satisfy a qualification of being the least restrictive means necessary to accomplish a compelling governmental interest. The restrictions imposed by Governors and municipalities upon the number of people who can assemble in a private church gathering appears to fail these tests.

First, these numerical restrictions are completely arbitrary in nature. There has been no tested nor proven scientific or medical data to show us what “number” of people that congregate together are a danger to society. The number has varied from place to place and moment by moment. Somewhere it’s 50, other places its 10 and there are still other variations. When politicians assign an “acceptable” number of people allowed in a private church, they are reducing our right to Freedom of Religion to a first come, first served privilege. Our first foundational document reads:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”

The government deciding who can attend a service by way of a numerical limit does not demonstrate an equality of rights and ought to be seen as a per se violation of the principle of separation of church and state.

Secondly, in the current scare, these orders are not being applied equally upon secular businesses and other institutions. When arbitrary number limits are applied to a church and not to a library, post office, grocery store, or hotel gym, there is not equal application. These orders try to justify unequal application based upon the definition of “essential” services. By what authority does the government declare the church non-essential? The Church is a place where people turn for help and for comfort in a climate of fear and uncertainty. In a time of crisis, people are fearful and in need of comfort and community, more than ever before. Even people who do not attend church regularly, or perhaps never go to church, need to know that there is somewhere for them to go when they need help. Since Roman persecution of the church ended, the church has been viewed by Western civilization as an essential part of society, a refuge in time of trouble or need, a place of peace and a sanctuary for the weary, even a place of healing and provision. More salient for believers is that the Bible pointedly addresses the issue of assembling during troubled times:

“Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” Heb 10:25

Many in the church take this as a solemn command. To deny a Christian his obligation to gather with his local called out body is to put him at odds with a fundamental tenet of the faith. For a believer in Christ there are few things as essential as the gathering of the body of Christ in the study of God’s Word and worship of His Glory. As a matter of fact, the Bible teaches that since we are eternal beings in this temporary world, God’s word is more essential than food.

“But Jesus replied, “It is written and forever remains written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes out of the mouth of God.’” Matthew 4:4

When those in government can assign a label of non-essential to the practice of religion, then government is taking a very serious and dangerous role of defining religion, which is expressly forbidden in our Bill of Rights and in a majority of our State Constitutions.

Finally, these restrictions are not reasonable and not the least restrictive means necessary. The case law used to define reasonableness in these laws are easily distinguishable. In Moore v. Draper, the Florida Supreme Court held that Moore could be quarantined and prevented from attending church because he had Tuberculosis. The court also said that once he was healthy he could no longer be reasonably or legally quarantined and prevented from attending church. The current laws restricting the number of attendees of a church are not restrictions on one unhealthy individual. They are restrictions upon a group of healthy people from attending church. The court said that such a restriction would be unreasonable. Additionally, the court did not order the entire church to be shut down to keep Moore healthy, which is exactly what these orders are trying to suggest is a reasonable and Constitutional solution.

Limiting an entire congregation of people for the safety of those who may be at risk of infection does not meet the standard of Moore, nor can it be seen as the least restrictive means necessary. The Florida case of Varholy v. Sweat is distinguishable for the same reasons as Moore. Finally, in Employment Division vs. Smith, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a “neutral, generally applicable law” restricting use of a hallucinogenic plant was not an unreasonable interference upon freedom of religion. Because the current restrictions upon church assemblies are not generally applicable to every other place where people will congregate, Smith is not controlling and proponents of church meeting bans find it no support.

Although it is argued the “protection of the public health is one of the prime duties resting upon the State” we cannot escape the reality that the FIRST prime duty of every state is codified in the Declaration of Independence:

“…that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

There is nothing in the law or precedent to establish a blanket and arbitrary assertion of “state of emergency” as an unquestionable authority. There is nothing in law or precedent to support a restriction on the number of people who can assemble in a church, for health reasons or otherwise, as a criterion for denying the essential Right of Freedom of Religion. There is everything in history and experience that says such actions by government are unreasonable and oppressive restrictions upon the essential and inherent Right of Freedom of Religion. Rev. Jonathan Witherspoon, founder of Princeton University gave this warning:

“There is not a single instance in history in which civil liberty was lost, and religious liberty preserved entire.”

When Peter and the apostles were told by law not to gather, preach, lay hands on the sick for God to grant them healing or else be thrown into prison, they chose to continue to practice their faith. After they escaped from prison and were told by God to go back and assemble with the people and preach and heal, they did exactly that. And when they were questioned by the government as to why they continued to break this law, the apostles did not hesitate or make excuse, they simply said, “We ought to obey God rather than men.”(Acts 5:29) True to the history that makes America great, our pastors and church members should not so easily surrender a fundamental rights so faithfully contended for by those who have gone before. Who will stand and not let the landmarks be moved?

Learn more at KrisAnneHall.com

Learn YOUR Constitution at LibertyFirstSociety.com– The Constitution as if the founders themselves were teaching it. An education worthy of the highestest institutions of learning because they won’t teach truth anymore!