Why is a centuries old U.S. Constitution still valid when things are clearly a lot different now?

Because it does not change. The U.S. Constitution is still valid because Congressmen cannot commit mutiny against their oath-of-office.

If you want a change, you will have to risk death to overthrow the government, just like Lincoln advised us. In his First Inaugural Address, he told us that whenever citizens “grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.” If you don’t understand why a president would tell citizens they can overthrow government, then you have been blinded. Perhaps you should pay attention.

HERE are reasons why the Constitution CANNOT CHANGE.

Nobody who swears an oath-of-office to uphold it can deny his oath by suggesting a change. Parliamentary procedure does not legalize mutiny.

Thomas Jefferson letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823, (The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Volume 7, Cambridge Library Collection, page 296):

“On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

The 1905 U.S. Supreme Court, South Carolina v. U.S., 199 US 437:

“The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now…”

In the 1966 famous case of Miranda v. Arizona the Supreme Court said of our rights

“And in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, they were secured “for ages to come, and . . . designed to approach immortality as nearly as human institutions can approach it,” (quoting Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 387 in 1821).

The 1901 Supreme Court in Downes v. Bidwill, 182 U.S. 244, ruled:

“It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.”

The Federalist Papers are not just some antiquated editorial opinion, they are, according to the Supreme Court in Cohens v. Virginia, the exact record of the intent of the Constitution.
Cohens v. Virginia 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 at page 418:

“The opinion of the Federalist has always been considered as of great authority. It is a complete commentary on our constitution; and is appealed to by all parties in the questions to which that instrument has given birth. Its intrinsic merit entitles it to this high rank; and the part two of its authors performed in framing the constitution, put it very much in their power to explain the views with which it was framed. These essays having been published while the constitution was before the nation for adoption or rejection, and having been written in answer to objections founded entirely on the extent of its powers, and on its diminution of State sovereignty, are entitled to the more consideration where they frankly avow that the power objected to is given, and defend it.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Byars v. U.S., 273 US 28 (1927) repeating their earlier decision in Boyd.

“…and it is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Headliner note to Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264

“The Supreme Court will construe provisions of Constitution which appear to be repugnant, so as to preserve the true intent and meaning of the Constitution… “

The U.S. Supreme Court, Boyd v. United States, 116 US 616, Page 635

“illegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing in that way, namely, by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure. It is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachment thereon. “

The U.S. Supreme Court, Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 page 442

“An Unconstitutional Act is not law; it confers no rights: it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 page 491

“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, Marbury vs. Madison. 5 US 137: All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void

U.S. Supreme Court in Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 469-471:

“In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”

DO NOT BE FOOLED. The U.S. Constitution is still valid.

Amendments cannot change the Constitution. They can only add to the Constitution. Article 5 allows amendment TO, but never an amendment OF the Constitution.

Do not be fooled by the 21st Amendment cancelling the 18th Amendment.

REAL amendments cannot change. REAL amendments are automatically the Supreme Law of the Land that judges in every state are bound thereby — Article 6, second paragraph.


The 18th Amendment section 2: “The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation”. It was one of those Martial Law Amendments that is forced on States even if it is contrary to State Constitutions.

The eight Martial Law Amendments (13,14,15, 18, 19, 23, 24, 26) all state that the Congress enforces them (even if the states don’t like it). Read more about the Martial Law Amendments Here.

The 18th Amendment was not an amendment that is automatically the Supreme Law of the Land. It was forced on the states after the 17th Amendment abandoned all hope of States controlling the Federal government that they created.

U.S. Constitution is still valid.

Steven Miller · originally answered March 27, 2019

::::: ===== :::::

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Your rights will continue to disappear if you do nothing.

If you don’t learn how to stand up to the beast, you will soon need another mark to buy or sell. This was mentioned by Bill Gates: “So eventually there will be this digital immunity proof that will help facilitate the global reopening up”. 

Learn to stand up to the beast before it is too late.

I recommend an online law course. While you are there, look up a few legal terms, then explore the Main Menu tab at the left.  Click Here

—- ===== ==== ===== —-

Steven D. Miller is a freelance writer producing informative blog posts, white papers, eBooks and high-density documentaries. He is available to offer hope to any audience that yearns to breathe free. Contact him at Steven.Miller@LibertyContentWriter.com
LibertyContentWriter.com

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: