DRUG WAR                                  Bureaucratic-Economic Police State

Contact our4th@ursm 



I present to you U.S.constitutional law


The following pages are mostly SCOTUS citations


Article III Courts http://www.ursm.us/article-iii-courts/

XIV, IV, V Amend. http://www.ursm.us/amends-iv-v-xiv/

Fundamental rights Ravin v Alaska  http://www.ursm.us/fundamental-rights/

Police Power http://www.ursm.us/police-power/  

Reasonable-Necessary http://www.ursm.us/reasonable-necessary/

Judicial Review http://www.ursm.us/compelling-rational/

Control Substance Act (CSA} UN Treaties http://www.ursm.us/c-s-a/

Foreign Constitutions http://www.ursm.us/foreign-constitutions/


Opposition to Chief Justice Saufly of the Maine supreme judicial Court Must read. Activist Political Court Not a law Court. A corrupt rigged judiciary sanctioning rational political police power.


Liberty is not a a fundamental right.

Marijuana laws are a political Question.

Rational police Power




The Truth is the Enemy of the Drug War


"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie." "It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." Joesph Goebbels,Nazi Minister of Propaganda


see State vs. Bernard Noble 

13 years 2-3 grams of marijuana habitual Offender.  Hearing on December 6, 2016. his prison sentence was reduced to 8 years. This was his post conviction relief for claiming the marijuana law are unreasonable state police power and unconstitutional to overturn his conviction. The judge violated the laws governing post conviction relief. Reduction in sentencing is not a criteria for post conviction relief. The court acknowledge the 

established the claim and entitled him to relief, because the court appointed council. Art. 930.7.   

"The application has alleged a claim that has been established, entitled the petitioner to relief, the court shall order the custodian, through the district attorney in the parish in which the defendant was convicted, to file … an answer on the merits … within a specified period not in excess of thirty days." Art. 927.  

The court never ordered an answer. The court continues to deprive Noble his liberty without due process of law until he is free completely. His application for post conviction relief has not been resolved.




United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

UN April 21, 2016


"Though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression." Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address In the Washington, D.C. Wednesday, March 4, 1801.


“Legislative authority to abridge [plaintiff’s liberty and] property rights … can be justified only by exceptional circumstances and, even then, by reasonable regulation only, and that legislative conclusions based on findings of fact are subject to judicial review.” Nebbia v. New York, 291 U.S. 502, 543; 54 S.Ct. 505, (1934).


"The legislature…, shall have full power to make and establish all reasonable laws and regulation… not repugnant to this constitution nor to that of the United States." Maine Constitution Article IV, Part lll section 1 last sentence. http://www.maine.gov/legis/const/


The Maine Courts have declared marijuana laws are rational use of police power, a political question violating the 4th Amendment.


The Maine courts have declared marijuana laws are a legislative issue, a political question because no fundamental rights have been impinged, deprived by state police power by their enforcement. Marijuana is not a fundamental right. The court (2012)declared the possession of marijuana does not implicate any fundamental right.


Federal and state courts have consisitently ignored the claim the enforcement of the marijuana laws implicates the deprivation of privacy, liberty, and property secured against unreasonable government intrusion by the 4th Amendment.


In all my lawsuits I have never ask the courts to declare marijuana a fundamental right.


2012 MSJC MAINE V DEE http://www.courts.maine.gov/opinions_orders/opinions/2012_documents/12me26de.pdf


2014 DEE V MAINE http://www.courts.maine.gov/opinions_orders/supreme/lawcourt/2014/14me106de.pdf


2009 http://www.med.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Kravchuk/2009/MJK_04282009_2-09cv163_Dee_v_USA_AFFIRMED_05282009.pdf


2006 Judge Crowley Order Doc. No. CV-06-707 http://Mainelaw.maine.edu/library/SuperiorCourt/decisions/CUMcv-06-707.pdf


2003 Judge Hornsby US District Court District of Maine, Doc. is Misc. No. 03-06-P-H


It is not about the federal classification of marijuana as a controlled substance. It is about criminalizing marijuana and the operation and effect of police power that seizes your person and marijuana and deprives your fundamental rights to liberty and property without a compelling state interest, without due process of law. There was no victim of a crime. Police are not protecting public safety. The laws are arbitrarily enforced which demonstrates criminalizing marijuana is unreasonable, unconstitutional violating the 4th 5th, and 14th Amendments.


The role of the judiciary is to defend fundamental rights secured by the Constitution. They can’t defend life, liberty, and property unless a claim of injury has been presented for adjudication. Being arrested for violating the marijuana laws a person has had standing and the right to ask why criminalizing marijuana is reasonable and necessary.


You do not have to be a lawyer to learn and understand what our rights are and how they are protected by the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments against unreasonable government intrusion and how those individual rights are betrayed by those of the judiciary who take an oath to protect them. http://www.courts.maine.gov/index.shtml


The judiciary demeans these Amendments. Lawyers will say the 4th means it is reasonable to seize your person because marijuana is illegal. Due process of the 5th and 14th means only the prosecution of the law. You have your day in court is due process.


These amendments also requires the police laws to be reasonable to protect the right of others, a compelling state interest.


DEFENDANTS should PLEAD not guilty, go to trial, make a motion to dismiss on the grounds that you have been deprived of your fundamental rights to liberty and property without a compelling state interest, without due process of law. The use of police power in the enforcement of the marijuana laws is unreasonable and  unconstitutional. And see what the judge will do. Some where a judge will recognize some one as a person. But defendants have to bring it to attention of the court.

The courts under the color of law in my lawsuits declared marijuana laws are a political question. Voting to change the marijuana laws, to be secure against unreasonable police power, makes pot users non persons.



<< New text box >>

At the United Nations opening session  of the General Assembly in NYC September 24, 2013, Preaident Obama was there and a lot of police.

White House 2012

War on Drugs
America's third civil war over property rights.
Slavery, Alcohol, Drugs

The war on drugs is rule without law.

War on Drugs Rule Without law
Police power is either reasonable of unreasonable.
Police power is to protect the rights of others.














Red Mass DC

Mexican Embassy

Un Reasonable Seize Marijuana-------------- Our Rights Their Betrayal
Print Print | Sitemap
Our Rights Their Betrayal