Brunson Brothers Beclown Themselves
How Brunson v Adams (Docket 22-380) "Saves The Constitution" By Destroying It Before The Democrats Can
Today on Legalese we are going to be examining the case of Brunson v Adams (Also commonly referred to at Docket 22-380)
I have had a number of people reach out to me asking for my opinion/analysis of this case and others asking for a breakdown and my prediction of their chance of success. Over the next two or three episodes I will be doing all of those things.
This case is looking to overturn the 2020 election results. Raland Brunson (The petitioner) is suing 388 members of Congress, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris & Mike Pence seeking to kick them out of office then declare them traitors & punish them for treason without any sort of trial. He also believes the court can and should remove the President, Vice-President and 388 members of Congress from office by judicial fiat. What’s more he also wants the court to reinstate Donald Trump as President because…. reasons… Largely because he has simply come to a personal conclusion the election was stolen… And on top of this injunctive relief he is seeking he also believes he deserves to be awarded nearly $3 Billion in monetary damages paid to him personally because “every person in the world has had their rights violated by the fraudulent election”… which not only makes sense, but it makes even more sense that one person should be awarded all $3 Billion when he also believes 8 billion people have also been wronged.
This case is fascinating for many reasons.
Whether you support this case, vehemently oppose it, or have simply never heard of it. Every one has something to gain from listening. Mostly this case demonstrates why, when someone says “I am doing this to save the Constitution” rather then blindly supporting that noble claim perhaps we should listen to whatever they have to say after that. Because in a time when people are understandably desperate for change, this is when grifters and carpet-baggers can easily move in by promising hope and change, while only ever intending to deliver false hope and empty promises.
It also explores something that may perhaps be an even greater threat to constitutional government than leftists who do not understand or believe in the principles of constitutionalism (who at least tend to be honest enough to admit that is their prerogative).
#Not All Leftists
This potentially greater threat is conservatives who say they are defending the Constitution, while everything they say or do after that suggests they are interested in doing the same thing as their leftist opponents.
#Not All Conservatives
However, Raland Brunson is just such a “conservative”… His case has gained surprisingly widespread support from jaded Trump voters who I hope will listen to these episodes I am creating about this case with an open mind and really ask yourself if it’s worth destroying as much of the Constitution as Raland Brunson’s case would necessarily ruin as the consequence of his success alone (not that there is ANY chance his case will succeed)? I will be explaining what constitutional provision and constitutionally protected individual rights would be damaged if not destroyed.
Is that loss a price Brunson’s supporters are really willing to pay in saving whatever remains of that legal instrument when all is said and done?
Legalese is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Personally I am not sympathetic to people looking for change by overthrowing election results they disagree with, usurping the power of State Legislatures to validate Presidential election results, letting unelected judges overrule the will of the people to the extent it rests in the democratic process. Who believe the concept of treason (a capital offense) is a term that can be thrown around so casually that it can be applied to anybody who simply has a different opinion than you, or belongs to a particular political party. Because an unavoidable conclusion of the spirit of this case is that mere disagreement is reason enough to be adjudged guilty of treason and punished accordingly without the privilege of due process, a speedy public trial, the right to confront one’s accusers and a trial by jury.
However, what I am certainly sympathetic to are the fundamental driving factors that can lead to this kind of desperate desire for change. We have all spent years watching blatant government corruption grow and multiply at virtually every level, the promise of a limited government of delegated authority often seems more like a fantasy than merely a distant reality.
We have seen our natural, individual rights, which governments are established to protect be so demeaned and undervalued by that very government for so long that most people don’t even understand the difference between a constitutionally protected natural, individual right and mere constitutional rights.…. Which is why just about every day we are told about some new law, or policy, or regulation, or executive action that will further deprive us of those rights that the government was created to protect.
Furthermore, elections have become meaningless, though not it the way most people listening to this will likely assume. I mean that after every election no matter who you voted for or how involved in the political process you may have been and what political party happens to be in power your efforts to bring change are for naught. We are promised hope and change, yet regardless of which candidate wins or which party hold a majority we all know that by the time the next election comes around our government will be bigger than it is now. And no matter what, the government will be stealing and spending more of our money than it does now. It will be stealing more money from future generations yet unborn, by borrowing against their future productivity, encouraged by the Treasury who see no qualms with trying to print our way to prosperity. This, despite the undeniable fact that’s it’s that very printing of their monopoly money that is eating out the substance of the currency we have to earn and government simply steals. I have no doubt that by the time the next major election happens we will be fighting more endless, illegal and immoral wars with more American soldiers be stationed around the world. Soldiers who will be killing more innocent people and more of our soldiers being killed in turn.
In short, everything that should shrink will grow and everything that should be growing (from the protections of our individual rights to our standard of living) are all shrinking…. But these same lessons can and should be applied to the people who are latching onto this case as some kind of sign of hope.
But considering the condition we find ourselves in at the moment as a nation its understandable why there are many people searching for a political deus ex machina that will restore the country to the constitutional federal-republic that she was meant to be. And in desperation, many people will be prone to cling to whatever appears to promise to provide whatever it is we are personally looking for..
The Brunson Brothers Home Page - https://brunsonbrothers.com/
Follow & Support
Legale§e is a subscriber-supported project. Please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
“Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers” Now Available on Amazon
Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.
Tags: Law, Constitution, Politics, legal theory, Moral Philosophy, Current Events, docket 22-380, Brunson v Adams, Raland Brunson, Lev Brunson, supreme court, treason, cert petition, election, overturn election, investigate congress, lawsuit, tenth circuit, district court, Utah