REPUBLIC REVIEW

THE IRREFUTABLE ARGUMENT FOR REPUBLIC REVIEW

© Mobius Strip Press LLC
www.reclaimingtherepublic.org
www.mobiusstrippress.com

REPUBLIC REVIEW ARGUMENT IN BULLET FORMAT

1. In accordance with Article Seven of the Constitution, the Constitution is a compact/contract written “for” and “by” the States
2. The legal definition of “ratification” is: “the action of signing or giving formal consent to a treaty, compact/contract, or agreement, making it officially valid”
3. For the compact/contract to be given force it required a threshold of “Stakeholders” buy‐in (“State” buy‐in)

(2) In accordance with Article Seven and Article Five the States are THE principal Stakeholders of this compact/contract. Consequently, ONLY the States possess SOVEREIGNTY over the compact/contract; thus:

• Only the States could ratify the Constitution
• Only the States possess the authority to ratify amendments
• Conversely, the Constitution does not grant the authority to the Supreme Court, the President, or Congress to ratify the Constitution or an Amendment to the Constitution; therefore they are not PRINCIPALParties to this compact/contract.

(3) In accordance with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, the States are the SOVEREIGNS who possess Supremacy over all things not delegated to the general (i.e. Federal) government within the Compact/contract.

• The general government supremacy is limited to ONLY those objects/powers delegated by the States within the Compact/contract to the general government, ratified amendments to the Constitution andconstitutionally ratified Treaties (See Article Six Section Two)
• Accordingly, the States delegated specific, defined and limited ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES,AND POWERS (RRPs) within the compact/contract (i.e. Constitution) to the general governmentand the general government was constrained per the compact/contract from doing anything that wasnot specifically delegated to it within the compact/contract (See Article Six Section Two, and theNinth and Tenth Amendments)

(4) The only way the general government can Constitutionally obtain a new RRP is by requesting that the States delegate the desired RRP to them (the general government) via an Amendment to the Constitution in accordance with the Constitutional amendment process. The “General Welfare and Defense,” “Commerce,” “Necessary and Proper,” and “Supremacy” clauses are not ambiguous portals for the general government to assume new RRP’s. These clauses only apply to the RRPs enumerated in the Constitution and Amendments http://reclaimingtherepublic.org/ http://www.mobiusstrippress.com/ to the Constitution that have been ratified and Treaties constitutionally ratified by two thirds of the Senate (See Article Six, The Ratification Debates, Madison’s Veto of the 1817 Bonus Bill, and Federalist Papers)

(5) Politicians, Jurists, Lawyers, Officers, officials, professors, and persons claiming profound understanding of the Constitution within and outside of the general government since 1791 have used lies, deceit, and collusion to convince the States to allow the general government the ability to assume unconstitutional RRPs without following the codified process within the Constitution (See The Ratification Debates and Madison’s Veto of the 1817 Bonus Bill, and the Federalist Papers)

• Therefore, all RRP’s being exercised that cannot be found within the Constitution and the ratified Amendments are blatant violations of the Constitution and usurpations of States’ RRPs andsovereignty (See Ratification Debates, Madison’s Veto of the Bonus Bill, and the Federalist Papers)
• For almost two centuries the general government and public servants at all levels have failed to comply with the Constitution as ratified and now our Republic is in grave peril due to theseusurpations.

THE IRREFUTABLE ARGUMENT FOR REPUBLIC REVIEW

Republic Review Argument in Bullet Format
(1) In accordance with Article Seven of the Constitution, the Constitution is a compact/contract written “for”
and “by” the States

• The legal definition of “ratification” is: “the action of signing or giving formal consent to a treaty,compact/contract, or agreement, making it officially valid”
• For the compact/contract to be given force it required a threshold of “Stakeholders” buy‐in (“State”buy‐in)

(2) In accordance with Article Seven and Article Five the States are THE principal Stakeholders of this compact/contract. Consequently, ONLY the States possess SOVEREIGNTY over the compact/contract; thus:

• Only the States could ratify the Constitution
• Only the States possess the authority to ratify amendments
• Conversely, the Constitution does not grant the authority to the Supreme Court, the President, or Congress to ratify the Constitution or an Amendment to the Constitution; therefore they are not

PRINCIPAL Parties to this compact/contract.
(3) In accordance with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, the States are the SOVEREIGNS who possess
Supremacy over all things not delegated to the general (i.e. Federal) government within the
Compact/contract.

• The general government supremacy is limited to ONLY those objects/powers delegated by the States within the Compact/contract to the general government, ratified amendments to the Constitution and constitutionally ratified Treaties (See Article Six Section Two).
• Accordingly, the States delegated specific, defined and limited ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND POWERS (RRPs) within the compact/contract (i.e. Constitution) to the general governmentand the general government was constrained per the compact/contract from doing anything that was http://reclaimingtherepublic.org/ http://www.mobiusstrippress.com/ not specifically delegated to it within the compact/contract (See Article Six Section Two, and theNinth and Tenth Amendments)

(4) The only way the general government can constitutionally obtain a new RRP is by requesting that the States delegate the desired RRP to them (the general government) via an Amendment to the Constitution in accordance with the Constitutional amendment process. The “General Welfare and Defense,” “Commerce,” “Necessary and Proper,” and “Supremacy” clauses are not ambiguous portals for the general government to assume new RRPs. These clauses only apply to the RRPs enumerated in the Constitution and Amendments to the Constitution that have been ratified and Treaties constitutionally ratified by two thirds of the Senate (See Article Six, The Ratification Debates, Madison’s Veto of the 1817 Bonus Bill, and Federalist Papers)

(5) Politicians, Jurists, Lawyers, Officers, officials, professors, and persons claiming profound understanding of the Constitution within and outside of the general government since 1791 have used lies, deceit, and collusion to convince the States to allow the general government the ability to assume unconstitutional RRPs without following the codified process within the Constitution (See the Ratification Debates and Madison’s Veto of the 1817 Bonus Bill, and the Federalist Papers)

• Therefore, all RRPs being exercised that cannot be found within the Constitution and the ratified Amendments are blatant violations of the Constitution and usurpations of States’ RRPs and
sovereignty. (See Ratification Debates, Madison’s Veto of the Bonus Bill, and the Federalist Papers)
• For almost two centuries the general government and public servants at all levels have failed to comply with the Constitution as ratified and now our Republic is in grave peril due to these
usurpations.

(6) This audit is what Madison and Jefferson attempted to accomplish in 1798 with the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. (see the article Nullification of Interposition by G. R. Mobley)

• Jefferson audited the Constitution in his letter to the Kentucky State Legislators in 1798 (See Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799).
• Madison called for the State to fulfill their duty to protect their State and citizen from despotic government calling on the other States “that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co‐operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people.” (See Virginia Resolution of 1798 and James Madison, Report on the Virginia Resolutions 1800)

(7) Republic Review is what Madison and Jefferson attempted with Virginia and Kentucky when these States called upon their fellow Stakeholders to join them in rebuking the general government for violating their Constitution (See Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799 and see the article Nullification
of Interposition by G. R. Mobley)

• Their fellow States failed to fulfill their obligation of oversight over their compact/contract which is why Madison and Jefferson were not successful in conducting Republic Review and why Jefferson lamented in the Kentucky Resolution of 1799 and Madison lamented in Madison’s 1800 Notes on the Virginia Resolutions.
• The first and obvious action was nullification of these ACT’s but if that is what they were seeking then they would not have recommended the others actions in these Resolutions or lamented when the other States failed to respond in kind.

(8) In harmony with Madison and Jefferson’s actions the audit only requires one State to initiate and call for
Republic Review (See Republic Review Process Model)