Why aren't PFAW and the other groups acting against SB 2082

We need to get the message out to the groups that challenge the Christian Right to make sure our Congress does not pass the Constitution 'restoration' Act. This is an act that opens the door for Dominionists to take over our nation, shred our Constitution, oppress women, and kill people who don't agree with their Intolerant and slanted view of religion. This is the act below
We need to act against SB 2082. It reads as such:
108th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 2082
To limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 12, 2004
Mr. SHELBY (for himself, Mr. MILLER, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. GRAHAM of South Carolina, Mr. INHOFE, and Mr. ALLARD) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A BILL
To limit the jurisdiction of Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Constitution Restoration Act of 2004'.

TITLE I--JURISDICTION

SEC. 101. APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

(a) IN GENERAL-

(1) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable

`Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgement of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

(2) TABLE OF SECTIONS- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`1260. Matters not reviewable.'.

(b) APPLICABILITY- Section 1260 of title 28, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall not apply to an action pending on the date of enactment of this Act, except to the extent that a party or claim is sought to be included in that action after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 102. LIMITATIONS ON JURISDICTION.

(a) IN GENERAL-

(1) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28- Chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end of the following:

`Sec. 1370. Matters that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review

`Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the district court shall not have jurisdiction of a matter if the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review that matter by reason of section 1260 of this title.'.

(2) TABLE OF SECTIONS- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`1370. Matters that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review.'.

(b) APPLICABILITY- Section 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall not apply to an action pending on the date of enactment of this Act, except to the extent that a party or claim is sought to be included in that action after the date of enactment of this Act.

TITLE II--INTERPRETATION

SEC. 201. INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.

In interpreting and applying the Constitution of the United States, a court of the United States may not rely upon any constitution, law, administrative rule, Executive order, directive, policy, judicial decision, or any other action of any foreign state or international organization or agency, other than English constitutional and common law.

TITLE III--ENFORCEMENT

SEC. 301. EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL CASES NOT BINDING ON STATES.

Any decision of a Federal court which has been made prior to or after the effective date of this Act, to the extent that the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal jurisdiction under section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by this Act, is not binding precedent on any State court.

SEC. 302. IMPEACHMENT, CONVICTION, AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES FOR CERTAIN EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL ACTIVITIES.

To the extent that a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States or any judge of any Federal court engages in any activity that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court of that justice or judge, as the case may be, by reason of section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as added by this Act, engaging in that activity shall be deemed to constitute the commission of--

(1) an offense for which the judge may be removed upon impeachment and conviction; and

(2) a breach of the standard of good behavior required by article III, section 1 of the Constitution.

This is my insight:

There are 3 disturbing facts about it:
1. The Supreme Court is susposed to be the highest court, if this passes this will not be true any longer.
2. It might just allow judges to exact biblical punishment on offenders.
3. The fact that it refers to 'God' and not 'Religious Figures' tells me something, according to SB 2082 I can't be punished for putting up a monument declaring God to be the source of government. But what will happen if I put up a monument declaring Vishnu to be the source of government?

We need to act now. Tell these groups to act before it is too late, this is very crucial and not doing so might allow a Theocracy to take root in our nation.

As early as Marbury v. Madison, the High Court let the other branches know what it would and would not handle. And if it comes to fundamental rights, the High Court rules on it....and promotion of religion (or the right not to be exposed to that promotion) is a fundamental right. I would argue that this is not constitutional, and not only should PFAW be up in arms, Americans United, of which I am a member, should also be up in arms. My prediction is that this will never come about.

that has been fighting and challenging the Jerry Falwell's Pat Robertson's, the religious right, etc. since 1982, is usually at the forefront of these kinds of fights, I've been a supporter for many years and I know they need help and funding.

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/

I support it and I visit the groups that are like them too. I think though that these groups need to oppose this act ASAP. I personally should try to support People for the American Way, fighting the Christian Right can be hard sometimes.

Sorry, I meant that as a reply to you.