Changes

===Due Process=== -- Certain rights may be temporarily or permanently suspended through a court trial, or ''due process''.  If someone has committed a theft, for example, he may be found guilty by a jury of his peers, incarcerated, and thus lose a great deal of his personal freedom for a certain period of time.  He may also be forced to turn over some of his property to settle the related fine or to pay restitution.  In the most extreme criminal cases, such as capital murder, the accused may forfeit his right to life.  

===Due Process===

Certain rights may be temporarily or permanently suspended through a court trial, or ''due process''.  If someone has committed a theft, for example, he may be found guilty by a jury of his peers, incarcerated, and thus lose a great deal of his personal freedom for a certain period of time.  He may also be forced to turn over some of his property to settle the related fine or to pay restitution.  In the most extreme criminal cases, such as capital murder, the accused may forfeit his right to life.  

===Injunctions=== -- A court may also issue an injunction to temporarily suspend a person’s right to conduct certain activities.  Technically speaking, an injunction does not constitute due process, since no jury is involved. However, an injunction is generally regarded as an acceptable infringement on personal rights, inasmuch as it is a temporary measure and seeks only to block activities which may be harmful to others, or which may be found illegal at a subsequent trial. Nevertheless, injunctions cannot compel any person to do what is otherwise illegal or unconstitutional, such as forcing a witness to testify against himself or forcing a witness to change testimony which the witness believes to be true.  

===Injunctions===

A court may also issue an injunction to temporarily suspend a person’s right to conduct certain activities.  Technically speaking, an injunction does not constitute due process, since no jury is involved. However, an injunction is generally regarded as an acceptable infringement on personal rights, inasmuch as it is a temporary measure and seeks only to block activities which may be harmful to others, or which may be found illegal at a subsequent trial. Nevertheless, injunctions cannot compel any person to do what is otherwise illegal or unconstitutional, such as forcing a witness to testify against himself or forcing a witness to change testimony which the witness believes to be true.  

===Lawsuits To Protect the Rights of Others=== -- Although not explicitly stated in the Constitution, it is clear that the exercise of one person’s unalienable rights may not interfere with the exercise of another’s. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. is alleged to have said, “The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins.” In other words, a person is free to exercise his or her unalienable rights without restraint, so long as he harms no other person, nor prevents anyone from exercising their own rights. When conflict does arise, the offended party may sue in a court of law in order to have their rights restored, or to be made financially whole, by legal process.

===Lawsuits To Protect the Rights of Others=== -- Although not explicitly stated in the Constitution, it is clear that the exercise of one person’s unalienable rights may not interfere with the exercise of another’s. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. is alleged to have said, “The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins.” In other words, a person is free to exercise his or her unalienable rights without restraint, so long as he harms no other person, nor prevents anyone from exercising their own rights. When conflict does arise, the offended party may sue in a court of law in order to have their rights restored, or to be made financially whole, by legal process.

===Eminent Domain=== -- Whenever there is a compelling need to appropriate privately owned real estate for use by the general public, the government may exercise the power of ''eminent domain'' to take the land.  There are two provisos to this usurpation. First, the land must be used for a public project, such as a highway, a utility line, a canal, a federal fort or building, etc.  It cannot be taken for private use, even if the recipient intends to benefit the public thereby, such as by putting a shopping mall or a new row of houses on the property.  (The Supreme Court in 2005 seriously erred on this issue in the 5-4 ''Kelo'' decision.) Second, the owner must be fairly compensated for the cost of the land. The fair market value is the highest price the owner would get for the property, were he to make it publicly available. In the event that the owner and the government cannot agree on a price, an appraiser may be asked to help assess the value.  If there is still no agreement, the case may be put before a court and both sides may produce expert witnesses to attest the property’s worth.

===Eminent Domain===

Whenever there is a compelling need to appropriate privately owned real estate for use by the general public, the government may exercise the power of ''eminent domain'' to take the land.  There are two provisos to this usurpation. First, the land must be used for a public project, such as a highway, a utility line, a canal, a federal fort or building, etc.  It cannot be taken for private use, even if the recipient intends to benefit the public thereby, such as by putting a shopping mall or a new row of houses on the property.  (The Supreme Court in 2005 seriously erred on this issue in the 5-4 ''Kelo'' decision.) Second, the owner must be fairly compensated for the cost of the land. The fair market value is the highest price the owner would get for the property, were he to make it publicly available. In the event that the owner and the government cannot agree on a price, an appraiser may be asked to help assess the value.  If there is still no agreement, the case may be put before a court and both sides may produce expert witnesses to attest the property’s worth.

===Invasion and Rebellion=== -- In the event of an invasion of the United States, or a rebellion against the government, the right of ''habeas corpus'' may be temporarily withheld.  Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution provides: “The privilege [right] of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

===Invasion and Rebellion===

In the event of an invasion of the United States, or a rebellion against the government, the right of ''habeas corpus'' may be temporarily withheld.  Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution provides: “The privilege [right] of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

A writ of habeas corpus is a judicial order that commands a prison official or jailer to bring a detainee before a judge to determine if said person is being lawfully held and, if not, to command his release. Anyone who objects to someone’s detention may petition for the writ. This right is therefore one of the surest guarantees of liberty, because it prevents the government from arbitrarily imprisoning those it sees as a threat to its power. The right may only be suspended when the nation faces imminent or actual invasion, or when a violent rebellion has been launched against federal personnel or property, and then only to the extent the “public safety” requires it.  

A writ of habeas corpus is a judicial order that commands a prison official or jailer to bring a detainee before a judge to determine if said person is being lawfully held and, if not, to command his release. Anyone who objects to someone’s detention may petition for the writ. This right is therefore one of the surest guarantees of liberty, because it prevents the government from arbitrarily imprisoning those it sees as a threat to its power. The right may only be suspended when the nation faces imminent or actual invasion, or when a violent rebellion has been launched against federal personnel or property, and then only to the extent the “public safety” requires it.  

===Direct Taxation=== -- Any activity or right that is taxed is necessarily infringed. In ''McCulloch vs. Maryland'', U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall observed that “the power to tax involves the power to destroy.” The fiscal encumbrance of any unalienable right, therefore, is a violation of that right and may lead to its destruction. For that reason, the taxing power of Congress is strictly limited. It is divided into two broad classes which may not be violated: ''Direct'' with apportionment; and ''Indirect'' with uniformity. Congress has two choices. It may either tax things which do not involve the exercise of unalienable rights (thus making such a tax completely '''voluntary''' or '''Indirect'''.) Or, Congress may tax an unalienable right through apportionment among the states (thus making the tax '''mandatory''' or '''Direct''', but politically unpopular.) No other kinds of taxes are permitted. All must fall within one of these two categories.  

===Direct Taxation===

Any activity or right that is taxed is necessarily infringed. In ''McCulloch vs. Maryland'', U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall observed that “the power to tax involves the power to destroy.” The fiscal encumbrance of any unalienable right, therefore, is a violation of that right and may lead to its destruction. For that reason, the taxing power of Congress is strictly limited. It is divided into two broad classes which may not be violated: ''Direct'' with apportionment; and ''Indirect'' with uniformity. Congress has two choices. It may either tax things which do not involve the exercise of unalienable rights (thus making such a tax completely '''voluntary''' or '''Indirect'''.) Or, Congress may tax an unalienable right through apportionment among the states (thus making the tax '''mandatory''' or '''Direct''', but politically unpopular.) No other kinds of taxes are permitted. All must fall within one of these two categories.  

Under Direct taxation, Congress may tax the right to own property, earn a living in the private sector, enjoy health care, attend synagogue, publish a newspaper, or any other fundamental right. But all such taxes must be apportioned among the states.  On the other hand, under Indirect taxation Congress may impose a duty on certain imports, or it may levy excises on privileged activities and commodities, such as tobacco, alcohol, government licenses, and certain federally-connected occupations and investments. But the tax in these cases must be uniform throughout the United States. If a tax falls outside these parameters, it is unconstitutional and must be struck down.

Under Direct taxation, Congress may tax the right to own property, earn a living in the private sector, enjoy health care, attend synagogue, publish a newspaper, or any other fundamental right. But all such taxes must be apportioned among the states.  On the other hand, under Indirect taxation Congress may impose a duty on certain imports, or it may levy excises on privileged activities and commodities, such as tobacco, alcohol, government licenses, and certain federally-connected occupations and investments. But the tax in these cases must be uniform throughout the United States. If a tax falls outside these parameters, it is unconstitutional and must be struck down.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that in the vast majority of situations where God-given rights are legally infringed or suspended, it is not all rights which are affected, but only a few particular rights, and only for a particular purpose and brief duration. (The obvious exception is when a person has been found guilty of a capital crime and is sentenced to death.) Aside from these special circumstances, the government cannot restrict, suspend, cancel, or even tax the exercise of any unalienable right. The People of America are sovereign, and they have informed their servant government that it cannot arbitrarily interfere with their inheritance from God.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that in the vast majority of situations where God-given rights are legally infringed or suspended, it is not all rights which are affected, but only a few particular rights, and only for a particular purpose and brief duration. (The obvious exception is when a person has been found guilty of a capital crime and is sentenced to death.) Aside from these special circumstances, the government cannot restrict, suspend, cancel, or even tax the exercise of any unalienable right. The People of America are sovereign, and they have informed their servant government that it cannot arbitrarily interfere with their inheritance from God.

== Threats & Safeguards ==

== Threats & Safeguards ==