In some recent polling data, most Americans expressed a negative view of the federal government, with many of them in another poll saying it poses an “immediate threat to citizens.”
That probably sounds extreme to some people, but this story about IRS abuse should be enough to convince any normal person the the federal government is despicable.
For another example, let’s look at a case involving the thugs at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This Reason TV video provides the background.
This is a horrifying video to watch. Anybody with a shred of decency should be outraged.
Fortunately, all nine Supreme Court Justices sided with the property owners. I don’t know if they were outraged, but they made the right legal decision. The Wall Street Journal opined about the outcome.
These are hard times for economic liberty, but the Supreme Court on Wednesday offered a modest reason to hope. In a 9-0 ruling, they concluded that the Environmental Protection Agency can’t terrorize Americans via regulation without allowing them a day in court. …The case landed at the High Court after the Sacketts tried to appeal the wetlands designation. But the EPA refused to grant a review or lookback hearing, because an appeals process isn’t explicitly required by the Clean Water Act. Only after the EPA moved to enforce the compliance order would the Sacketts get their day in court. The EPA almost never needs to enforce, however, because disobeying a compliance order—even one that is later overturned—is legal proof in its mind of “willfulness” or a tacit admission of guilt. The only way to defend yourself is to break the law and therefore invite even higher penalties. The Sacketts claimed this Star Chamber violates their due process rights. …Congress ought to amend the Clean Water Act to make the law’s jurisdiction clearer. Meantime, the ordeal of the Sacketts shows once again how this agency with a $10 billion budget and 17,000 agents has become a regulatory tyranny for millions of law-abiding Americans.
Sadly, the decision still leaves the EPA thugs with too much power for discretionary abuse, as Brian Garst notes.
We’ve still got a long way to go to restore basic property rights in this country, and the Sackett’s still have to fight the EPA on the merits of the case as they seek to disprove the claim that their own property is a “wetland,” much less a “navigable water” of which the Act supposedly deals, despite having no water. But at least now they have their Constitutional due process rights recognized, so that they may challenge EPA’s jack-booted thugs in court without first having to rack up millions in fines waiting for EPA to allow them to do so.
But let’s enjoy at least a partial victory. I’m smiling today at the thought of unhappy bureaucrats at the EPA.
Last but not least, I want to acknowledge that government thuggery is not limited to the federal government in Washington.
- If you have a soul, you will be outraged by this example of a local government abusing poor people.
- If you have decency, you will be disgusted by this example of a state government persecuting someone who didn’t commit a crime.
- If you believe in basic rights, you will be horrified by this example of a foreign government seeking to outlaw political dissent and free speech.
Gee, do you detect a pattern?
[…] to the extent that the government now tries to regulate ponds on private property and control the building of houses on dry […]
[…] to the extent that the government now tries to regulate ponds on private property and control the building of houses on dry […]
[…] look at some of the things EPA bureaucrats do when they’re “working” (see here, here, here, and here), the country may be safer if they spend more time watching […]
[…] day, you get angry because an innocent person is being harassed by the […]
[…] who was hassled by the feds for building a pond on his own property. Or the family persecuted for building a house on their own […]
[…] metastasized to the extent that the government now tries to regulate ponds on private property and control the building of houses on dry […]
[…] metastasized to the extent that the government now tries to regulate ponds on private property and control the building of houses on dry […]
[…] metastasized to the extent that the government now tries to regulate ponds on private property and control the building of houses on dry […]
[…] P.P.S. Some environmental policies lead to disgusting examples of government thuggery (some of which, fortunately, are not successful). […]
[…] P.P.S. Some environmental policies lead to disgusting examples of government thuggery (some of which, fortunately, are not successful). […]
[…] P.P.S. Some environmental policies lead to disgusting examples of government thuggery (some of which, fortunately, are not successful). […]
[…] This environmentalist-driven example of EPA thuggery. […]
[…] This environmentalist-driven example of EPA thuggery. […]
[…] years ago, I shared a video about the Environmental Protection Agency’s brutal and thuggish tactics against an Idaho […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] outside, an example of cops “legally” stealing $17,000 from a man who committed no crime, a video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family, and a disturbing report about the Justice Department’s discriminatory attack on a hapless […]
[…] an example of cops “legally” stealing $17,000 from a man who committed no crime, a video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family, and a disturbing report about the Justice Department’s discriminatory attack on a hapless […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] This environmentalist-driven example of EPA thuggery. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] much-needed victory over tyrannical thugs at the Environmental Protection […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
Obtain and read “Unintended Consequences” by author John Ross. Although out-of-print and a little pricey, it is still available on ebay and amazon. It is a good read and offers solutions to our out-of-control government. The book combines fictional characters with accurate historical information and is a how-to book on “getting things done”.
Sellers of this book were harassed by ATF and other government agents. It seems that these government agents were not too keen on the book’s premise.
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family. […]
[…] spend much of my time focusing on the dangers of a bloated federal government. And if you’ve ever paid attention to the name of this blog, you know I have a special […]
[…] radicalism, such as the crazy claim that climate change causes AIDS, a reprehensible example of EPA thuggery, and a column about pointless recycling […]
[…] A Victory over the Ideological and Tyrannical Thugs at the EPA « International Liberty […]
Was it just the EPA or did the people descend upon city hall with their pitchforks to defend their open space views three miles away and prevent the lucky Sacketts from having a house that most other people did not?
Who is the EPA?
The EPA is we. We, the people, who think that your land is more valuable to us as a natural resource, as a view etc. as a marginal and minute benefit to us vs. your lifetime dream. But we are many and you, the Sacketts are only two, and so, we, the people, set your property, your lifetime dream, aside for our own use, by force. You insist, we fine you. You don’t pay the fine, we take you by force behind bars. What’s wrong with that?
Besides who are these Sacketts to have such a nice house. Most of us either don’t have one, and never think we will, and the few of us who do have such a house would like to close the door to others from doing the same and occupy 0.002 degrees of solid angle from our views. So, I’m getting together with my community buddies and the Sacketts drink hemlock if need be. People rule, people take, people put you behind bars if you resist. Only society has rights. Individuals have no rights, just obligation to serve the common good. Life, conscription, and service to community are the principles of an evolved society.
We will prosper!
Great video and great judicial outcome.
I wonder if the Clean Water Act and the EPA in general, with there huge fines, could be brought to court as unconstitutional for violating the 8th Amendment:
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
The video makes clear that the EPA imposes excessive fines, as does the Clean Water Act. They should have challenged both the act and the EPA fines in their case against the EPA as unconstitutional for violating the 8th Amendment.
[…] https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/a-victory-over-the-ideological-and-tyrannical-thugs-… Share this:TwitterRedditFacebookEmailPrintDiggStumbleUponLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. ← The Volokh Conspiracy » Unanimous Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Property Owners in Sackett v. EPA […]
Heartwarming.