The Rule of Law

From the Black’s Law Dictionary definition of “interposition”:

The doctrine that a state, in the exercise of its sovereignty, may reject a mandate of the federal government deemed to be unconstitutional or to exceed the powers delegated to the federal government.

The concept is based on the 10th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States reserving to the states powers not delegated to the United States. Historically, the doctrine emanated from Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dallas 419, wherein the state of Georgia, when sued in the Supreme Court by a private citizen of another state, entered a remonstrance and declined to recognize the court’s jurisdiction. Amendment 11 validated Georgia’s position.

Implementation of the doctrine may be peaceable, as by resolution, remonstrance or legislation, or may proceed ultimately to nullification with forcible resistance.

Empathy, Impartiality, and Justiceby Bob Renaud, May 28, 2009: Judge Sonia Sotomayor — President Barack Obama’s choice to replace Justice Souter on the US Supreme Court — is unqualified to serve on the most fundamental level: rather than judge without partiality, as our Constitution and the Bible commands, she has done the opposite by showing “empathy” and partiality in judgment. Read More

The Texas Supreme Court Upholds Church’s Right to Disciplineby Bob Renaud, August 9, 2007: On June 29, 2007, the Texas Supreme Court rendered a unanimous opinion affirming a Texas church’s authority to exercise discipline apart from civil interference. This decision is landmark because it is the first time a modern court has clearly and convincingly articulated that a church can carry out biblical under the authority of church government without fear of being overturned in civil court. Read More

The Rule of Lawby William Einwechter, March 29, 2005: No one is above the law — including presidents, judges, and legislators. In this article, William Einwechter explains what the rule of law is: that it finds its basis in the law of God and requires the confession that Christ, not man, is King. Read More

Constitutions, Oaths, and the Heritage of English Lawby Matthew L. Chancey, June 28, 2004: Justice Lyons is a confessing Christian who sincerely believes that his actions with respect to removing the Ten Commandments monument were consistent with keeping his oath of office to support the Constitution of the United States. However, my belief is that Justice Lyons’ positions as presented are based on several erroneous presuppositions about the Constitution, oaths, and English law in general. Read More

Do Laws and Standards Evolve?by Douglas W. Phillips, Esq., February 20, 2004: Every intellectual and cultural battle is won or lost in the assumptions. He who defines, wins. The controversy between evolution and Biblical creation is about much more than fossils and ape men. It concerns the basic presuppositions by which our society will answer questions concerning life, law, and human relationships. Most importantly, it is a battle over lordship: Who is Lord — God or man? Read More

Edward Coke and Righteous Interpositionby Dan Ford, January 6, 2004: Essentially because of the stalwart actions of Coke and other English jurists, our nation inherited a governing system that refused to recognize the decrees of any one person, of any one court, or of any one branch of government as the organic laws of the land. Read More

Bill Pryor Asks Chief Justice Moore If He Will Deny His GodJanuary 6, 2004: Mr. Chief Justice? And — And your understanding is that the federal court ordered — ordered that you could not acknowledge God; isn’t that right? Read More

As the World Turns?by Douglas W. Phillips, Esq., October 31, 2003: At this precise point in history, WORLD Magazine is not on the right side of the battle for freedom in this country. What they describe as a strategic difference is much more — it is a fundamental philosophical capitulation. Read More

The Rule of Law and Chief Justice Moore’s caseby Judge James DeWeese, October 22, 2003: A United States District Court judge ordered Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the lobby of the Alabama Supreme Court building. Justice Moore’s disobedience of that order caused many commentators to contend he violated the rule of law. Those commentators got the issue right but got the analysis wrong. Read More

Cultural Ramifications of Recent Court Decisionsby Alan Keyes, October 14, 2003: I think that we are in the midst of both a terrible and decisive crisis for this country. And also, probably a great moment of opportunity to turn things around. I waver day to day as to whether or not that opportunity shall in fact be capitalized upon. I don’t know. I don’t waver at all, however, about the nature of the crisis. Read More

In God I Trustby Roy S. Moore, August 28, 2003: The battle over the Ten Commandments monument I brought into Alabama’s Supreme Court is not about a monument and not about politics. Federal Judge Myron Thompson, who ordered the monument’s removal, and I are in perfect agreement on the fact that the issue in this case is: “Can the state acknowledge God?” Read More

Partial Transcript From Focus on the Familyby Dr. James Dobson, August 28, 2003: The following excerpts are from the Focus on the Family Radio broadcast, arguably one of the most important and powerful broadcasts in the history of the radio ministry. Read More

A Call to Stand with Chief Justice Mooreby Col. John Eidsmoe, August 27, 2003: Is Chief Justice Moore’s battle for the Ten Commandments a “lost cause?” There is no such thing as a lost cause until the last chapter of history has been written. Various new legal moves are underway, and the Spirit of God is at work. But regardless of the outcome of this case, we must take a stand for what is right. Read More

The Rule of Law Must Be Upheldby Alan Keyes, August 27, 2003: What we clearly acknowledge to be possible and even morally obligatory in case of the violation of individual rights must be even more compelling when the case involves the violation of the rights of the whole people. Read More

STAND: A Day With Chief Justice Roy Mooreby Wesley Strackbein, August 27, 2003: Two Fridays ago, in the early hours of August 15, 2003, fourteen men and women including five Vision Forum interns, four full-time staff members, three members from Boerne Christian Assembly, and two members of the Fisher Camera Clan met together in Vision Forum’s parking lot, readying ourselves for a journey of purpose. Read More

Professor Emeritus Backs Lawfulness of MooreAugust 27, 2003: In an exclusive interview with NewsMax.com, Dr. David Lowenthal, emeritus professor of political Science at Boston College, said the Founding Fathers would be appalled at the federal court order for the removal of the Ten Commandments monument. Read More

Who Is America’s Sovereign?by The Honorable Howard Phillips, August 20, 2003: The overarching question we face today is: “Who is America’s Sovereign?” and “What is His law?” Read More

Vision Forum Ministries®

The Rule of Law