Jon Roland - Constitution Society presents...

himself as a candidate for AG in Texas 2010:  http://youtu.be/nyFcXA616RQ

AND ...  as "The Legal Historian", this writer discovered about 3 years ago; and hve been using the Society's website:  www.constitution.org  - since:
http://youtu.be/aBiPh_CZnZ8

05.23.2011, An American Patriot's update of...As long as judges can ignore....

As long as judges can ignore the Principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence, 'We the People - elected and un-elected' must provide this missing fact of Law of God....which is the basis of the law courts of homo sapiens are suppose to be judging.  

That is because of the following misconception prevailing throughout our nation:  'Maybe Both founding documents were meant to be read and studied...even used as a guide to lawmaking with the art of governing....from Age of understanding right and wrong through death; "The Constitution is Law. The Declaration of Independence is not!"; along with the 'unwritten, but equally distorting myth': only attorney's and judges can handle The Constitution...sans Declaration...also sans any idea of principles 'declared'.  Because "You can't see the law in the Declaration". 

 All 3 branches of government deny or refuse to believe that God and Jesus Did and Does in Fact exercise 'the Way, Truth, and Light' of:  "among the powers of the earth, separate and equal station, Laws of Nature and of Nature's God, hold these truths to be self-evident, all men created equal, endowed by their Creator; and most important of all, from Mayflower to this day and the future: "with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we [every sovereign person, citizen or not] mutually pledge TO EACH OTHER our Lives [how many in how many parts of the globe or right here on our soil?],  our Fortunes [every, sovereign individual who served this nation from the Mayflower..and forever("A Nation, if we can keep it.}], and  our sacred Honor [each sovereign person who has stood for "Religion and Virtue" - [against all odds or not -]. This is what "..to respect its Flag.." means. 

The Supreme Court could find for "freedom of speech"  by using law by man; rather than Law from God. Here is the First Principle of the Constitution:  "The individual component of the polity is the person, which is defined as any being consisting of or having the essential cognitive attributes of a member of the species homo sapiens, including both the capacity to compete with others for the means to exercise the natural rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and the capacity to regulate its competitive actions to avoid depriving others of those rights..."*. 


The minister, licensed by members of homo sapiens, misrepresenting his  church license refused..declaring on their signs statements,  as vocal an insult his religion and disobedience to at least 3 of God's Commandments, demonstrated shouting the words through a megaphone and writing blasphemies on signs.  Here is the absent consideration of the second part: "..and the capacity to regulate its competitive actions to avoid depriving others of those rights..".  The "Freedom of Religion for the Father of Lance Corporal Matthew Spaulding was disregarded as not important to the case of freedom of speech,...only the second parenthetical expression of the First Amendment.  Thinking about disobedience to God's Law, can you name any one or all three of the Commandments from God through Abraham and from Jesus through Himself as the only pathway to God? These Commandments were the essence of Life, Liberty, and happiness from the Mayflower Compact in 1620, 156 years of Colonial America before either the Declaration or the Constitution. 


8/9 Justices sitting on their Judgment Seats of Homo Sapiens,  enforced a "regime**" of the principle  'Freedom of Speech'. There was no matter of public concern except what the judge 'defined' as public concern to thereby allow that the disobedience to God's Law -- The First Statement in the First Amendment didn't count as important for Mr. Spaulding or the celebration of his son, giving his life fighting for this First Amendment, as a memorial in Jesus Name.  Their concern was the gross misrepresentation of "Nature's God" and of the last, and most lasting, sentence ever written by men anywhere on this Globe:  "..with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our Sacred Honor....that Marine Corporal Lance Snyder gave "his last full measure" ! The eight justices gave their "opinion" in judgement as members of the species 'homo sapiens'; keeping to the high, "impregnable wall of separation" against "religion" so wrongly used in most all Court Cases from the local courts to the Supreme Court.  "The 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language" [thanks beyond words to] Noah Webster, our First Teacher of primary schools in America defined 'Religion' as follows:  "1. Religion, in its most comprehensive sense, includes a belief in the being and perfections of God, in the revelation of his will to man, in man's obligation to obey his commands, in a state of reward and punishment, and in man's accountableness to God; and also true godliness or piety of life, with the practice of all moral duties. It therefore comprehends theology, as a system of doctrines or principles, as well as practical piety; for the practice of moral duties without a belief in a divine lawgiver, and without reference to his will or commands, is not religion.".  There is much more to be found at www.1828.mshaffer.com.  For the record here is Mr. Webster's definition of "Freedom": 1. A state of exemption from the power or control of another; liberty; exemption from slavery, servitude or confinement. Freedom is personal, civil, political, and religious. [See Liberty.]. 2. Particular privileges; franchise; immunity; as the freedom of a city. 5. Any exemption from constraint or control. 8. License; improper familiarity; violation of the rules of decorum; with a plural. Beware of what are called innocent freedoms.


Because #8 directly addresses the license of the minister's "freedom" to speak, here is the 1828 definition of Liberty:    
ivil liberty is an exemption from the arbitrary will of others, which exemption is secured by established laws, which restrain every man from injuring or controlling another. Hence the restraints of law are essential to civil liberty."  The minister is allowed to have his Freedom of Speech without the Responsibility of his 'wrong actions' as "opinion", before God and Man.  Except that every American upset by this 'opinion' of 8/9 Justices, not Judge Alito, knows the judgement is intrinsically wrong...that the justices are locked-into the mind-set of 'No God in Court'; but not the consequence of "Satan is Welcome" in the guise of 'judgement by mankind's' inability to always perform as Jesus taught us. 

That is why just because you cannot see Principle, does not negate Law, especially from the Creator of Law!!!  This is the most egregious miscarriage of American and Constitutional Principles which has ever occurred.  Because it is Jesus and God, who are negated --- in virtually every aspect of this Supreme Court Case Docket #09-751.  


I have it downloaded to my computer - You should also, especially if you want "..the blessings of liberty to ourselves and Our Posterity(your kids and their's too!).  You need to hear the time it takes to speak to the distance, direction, placement of signs, absence or presence of signs,  words, feelings spent away from Principles of Declaration-constitution with God's Laws. And from: "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. Thomas Jefferson"; and is the reason Mr. Webster's "1828 American Dictionary is so important, and never should any "Bill" or any Court Decision be made, unless it stands at the elbows of Both Judges and Attorneys,  alongside a good knowledge of the original, 'not versioned or attempt to translate a lifestyle, principled way of living - not present in any "modern" world with the absence of Latin, Greek, Hebrew - '  KJV of The Bible...and "The Book of Mormon" because it started in 1823 and closely parallels US History since principle applied, is represented in ALL Three. 

SNYDER v. PHELPS ET AL. No. 09–751.  Argued October 6, 2010—Decided March 2, 2011
at,   https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010/09-751  :

        In summary: the Court found that the law of tort was being applied against the protesters not in a "content neutral" but rather in a "content based" or "viewpoint based" manner; the protesters were engaged in political speech, they were expressing themselves about a matter of public concern, not merely private matters; the protesters were in a place that is considered part of the "public forum;" and the protesters did not disrupt the funeral"!!!!   So much for "see" the Laws of God via 'homo sapiens'; and their 'whiles of Satan' are also reflected in Mt. Soledad; AZ v. Federal Government of Obama and Holder; and Wisconsin's State Government vs. Union's definition of their 'special rights as members-administrators-attorneys fraudulent use of taxpayer money'! And so much for 30 articles of socialist communist, 1947-1949 'udhr creeds of UNTRUTH #18, 19, "Everyone has a right to their opinion." falsity because 'They also have the responsibility for that "opinion" when [not if] they are Wrong! The responsibility of the opinion is the second part of 'opinion' which flies out the window of ignorance and "avoid 

 Whole, art. iii Supreme Court does not want any reference to God, nor to Principles as Lessons which Jesus taught.  Because only human-kind's written law is allowed [Matt. 7, these men are called Pharisees]. Satan, because he represents the disobedient, sinner, wrongdoer, profane, unjust are the reason for a court;  his whiles, can pretty much distort, misuse, and covet ignorance allowing judges to come to illogical conclusions from want of correct information and from want of God's Law or the last sentence of Amendment VII "and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the RULES OF COMMON LAW."   That's means 'Sir William Blackstone's " Commentaries on the Laws of England" which gives God's Law Full Measure as the origins of Law because "..Such, among others, are these principles: that we should live honestly, should hurt nobody, and should render to everyone his dues; to which three general precepts Justinian has reduced to whole doctrine of the law...".  There is a lot more in "Excepts from.." located in the appendix of the first edition of "Learn and Teach The Declaration and The U.S Constitution using original texts and the Classical Learning Method of the Founders [Research, Reflect, Relate, Record] by Joseph Andrews at www.teachconstitution.org.  Of course, reading it for it's completeness as Joseph did, is much more important; but at least there is a representation of part of reflection, relating, and recording of the Truth contained in the excerpt.   



It is time, after 391 years [don't discount each of the colony's laws], to reaffirm "assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of nature and of Nature's God entitle them,....  that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among............That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,  deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...".  We Must Allow the Promise of the Declaration be part of the Fulfillment of the Promise in the Constitution to prevail over the whiles of mankind, especially of the thrones of Executive/bureaucratic power; legislative who have forgotten or learned about both from the same public school system that forbids or does not obey its own laws to be sure All American History is Taught.... so that  "I believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution [Declaration], to obey its laws, to respect its Flag [in memory of Lance Corporal Laurence Snyder...to Mt. Soledad..and to all of US(A) to have given their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred Honor...because they understood or simply because they inherently have the Trust in the Virtue of those they love.

For all young people old enough to understand You Shall Not continue your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness for yourselves and your Posterity; until you understand the terrible, dark ages, of Social Justice which is not social or even justice...because God is justice; man is Not Capable unless mankind seeks God, Jesus and the Way, the Truth, and the Light......  God is Magnificent, "King of Glory...King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.."... as well as the Best choice for the unique, sovereign person you are because you were born in the United States of America with Founders who knew human nature and Freedom from God and His Son - Jesus.   

That the art of controlling human nature to keep government within the realm of reason to serve people....we must always be "A wise and frugal government...shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. (Thomas Jefferson, 1st inaugural Address, 3/4/1801 - almost 210 yrs. ago, to the day.)  This is a reflection of one of the Constitutional General Principles:  "The polity, or society, is created by the social contract, in which persons agree to join together for mutual benefit and defense, and to regulate their behavior to avoid forms of competition which are destructive of social coherence and effectiveness, such as violence, deception, or collusion, or to infringe on the rights of others."

"See" the Law - Docket #09-751 is about both of The First Amendment's "no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.. with God's Laws and "The Declaration of Constitutional Principles" as avoiding "depriving others of those rights", a.k.a. the purpose of Court of Law. 


Justice has not been done in the Case of Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, his father, or any American paying attention to principles of law which our nation has worked upon since 1620. A member of homo sapiens  -  the minister with his license - does not answer to breaking God's Laws: Thou Shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; Do not bear false witness against thy neighbor...;  Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.  With this much "disobedience" to God's Laws, the minister gave up his right to protection under #   8. License; improper familiarity; violation of the rules of decorum; with a plural. Beware of what are called innocent freedoms."; with civil liberty is an exemption from the arbitrary will of others, which exemption is secured by established laws, which restrain every man from injuring or controlling another. ..".

http://www.matthewsnyder.org/help.html  is the website for Matthew.  An American asking for justice from "The Rule of Law" Court; been denied that justice, and has the court costs to manage. Please visit and help if you can.

*"Declaration of Constitutional Principles" by Jon Roland available at https://www.constitution.org/consprin.htm  
**regime: "An unconstitutional statute is not a law, no matter how vigorously it may be enforced. Enforcement does not make what is enforced the law. What is enforced is regime. In a constitutional republic, the law and the regime should coincide.  If they do not, the regime is not law but anti-law." 

Submit a Public Comment | Citizens Redistricting Commission

Submit a Public Comment | Citizens Redistricting Commission

5/23/11 there are only 4 of more than 55 Public Input statements published at www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov. This speaker has decided to publish comment re the "priorities" of deciding location of each of the lines within the 58 counties of California. This comment was submitted in pdf form to the Commission:

Public Input Speaker #13 at San Marcos 5/13/2011:

"The world is in serious trouble. The fundamental values of this Nation are being undermined. There is continued crumbling of principle, virtue, integrity and religious values-----the foundation stones of civilization and the definitive ingredients of peace and happiness. (Elder Richard Scott)*"

Along with several citizens of Fallbrook, we became 'real-time' witnesses to the accuracy of this statement at a Wednesday night San Diego County Board of Education Meeting. You won't read the story in any newspaper or hear it on the news, but every word of Elder Scott was at work, against the parents and their children of Fallbrook Schools.**

The statement of Elder Scott and the Witness of the words at the County Board of Education bring relevancy to this Public Input meeting regarding the placement of district lines in relation to "prioritized criteria #1: Draw the districts with equal population, based on the U.S. Constitution": Amendment XIV:2 "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting whole number of "persons" in each State,..". And in Addition,The Preamble: "We the People of the United States in Order to form a more perfect Union...". These two excerpts from the Constitution combine to reflect one of the Constitutional Principles: "The individual component of the polity is the PERSON, which is defined as any being consisting of or having the essential cognitive attributes of a member of the species HOMO SAPIENS, including BOTH the capacity to compete with others for the means to exercise the NATURAL RIGHTS of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, AND the capacity to regulate its competitive actions to avoid depriving others of those rights and to sacrifice itself for the greater good of the polity as a whole or for their common posterity."***

#2 Priority of our 'Citizens Redistricting Committee is compliance "with the Federal Voting Rights Act to ensure minority voters have an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.". Perhaps, you don't hear the difficulty inherent in the use and definition of these words, but there is difficulty because 1) Our Constitution [or Declaration] doesn't recognize "minority" anymore than it does rich, poor, color, alien-status or any other characteristic of "HOMO SAPIENS"; and 2) "..But in order to apply this to the particular exigencies of each individual, it is still necessary to have recourse to human reason; whose office it is to discover, as was before observed, what the law of nature directs in every circumstance of life; by considering, what method will tend most effectually to our own substantial happiness. And if our reason were always, as in our first ancestor before his transgression, clear and perfect, unruffled by passions, unclouded by prejudice, unimpaired by disease or intemperance, the task would be pleasant and easy; we should need no other guide but this. But every man now finds the contrary in his own experience; that his reason is corrupt, and his understanding full of ignorance and error.(Excerpt from Sir William Blackstone's 'Commentaries of the Laws of England" 1765)".

These Principles are a major reason 'persons' came and come here from all over the world: The recognition of the sovereignty, under God, of the "person". Although, it is the long known and much respected 'Naturalized Citizen' who has often worked the hardest to preserve and protect the Freedoms of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - defined by person--never government.

When each 'We the People - Commission member' starts to draw and place that redistricting line anywhere in 58 counties of this State, REMEMBER 'The Priority':   One Man: One Vote is the Supreme Law of the Land - "superior to all other public acts, whether by officials or private citizens. .."***. The Constitution is #1 because the Supreme Law of the Land is #1. That you are protecting and equalizing 1 man:1 vote as consent from "We the People" to the government...not the other way around! Thank you, Catherine West, American and Private Native California

*Richard G. Scott, Quorum of the Twelve; Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints; BYU Commencement 5/10/2011.
** See: www.pyrrhicchange.blogspot.com for the 'rest of the story': "The San Diego Board of E..d..u..just got..."

***"Declaration of Constitutional Principles" Jon Roland; www.constitution.org - Section Rights, Powers, and Duties.

WI UNION PROTESTS COST STATE $8 MILLION from Breitbart TV 05.17

The other reason all union contracts are unconstitutional because the costs become indirect taxes on 'We the Peoples's property and effects named earnings without legislative process; because the Constitution does not recognize a group of citizens called 'union -members, administrative through attorney" when it says in Constitutional Principle: " The individual component of the polity is the PERSON, which is defined as any being consisting of or having the essential cognitive attributes of a member of the species HOMO SAPIENS, including Both the capacity to compete with others for the means to exercise the NATURAL RIGHTS of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, AND the capacity to regulate its competitive actions to AVOID DEPRIVING others of those rights and to sacrifice itself for the greater good of the polity as a whole or for their common posterity. ["Declaration of Constitutional Principles" Jon Roland; Constitution Society, www.constitution.org Section 'Rights, Powers, and Duties'] and in the Preamble "We the People". The Constitution does not make reference regarding size, group membership as wealthy, poor, suffering, offspring of illegal parents, or color - culture. 

The other part of the Constitution violated is the 14th Amendment: "....No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life ("houses, papers, and effects" of life-choices), liberty (to pursue happiness especially applied to "..are reserved to the ...respectively, or to the people."), or property (earnings as money, business, risk, benefit of life's choices) without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the EQUAL PROTECTION of the laws. AND two other 'Constitutional Principles': "In a constitutional republic, the constitution is the SUPREME LAW, superior to all other PUBLIC acts, whether by OFFICIALS or PRIVATE CITIZENS. ANY statute, regulation, executive order, or court ruling which is INCONSISTENT with that Supreme Law and NOT DERIVED from it IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL and NULL AND VOID FROM INCEPTION." With: 
"An unconstitutional statute is not a law, no matter how vigoously it may be enforced. Enforcement does not make what is enforeced the law. What is enforced is a REGIME. In a constitutional republic, the law and the regime should coincide. If they do not, the REGIME is not law but ANTI-LAW." 

Union Contracts with governments at ANY LEVEL are ANTI-LAW because the contracts are inconsistent with the Constitution as the IX, X, and XIV Amendments. That doesn't even go into the unconstitutional facts that members(person) are forced to used their membership dues for political purposes they do not agree with; have dues 'taxed' from paychecks even while on strike and for new 'workers' who earn less than $40/wk.; or that union's administration coerce the 'elected by union money -We the People', to perform at the union administration's bidding whatever the requirement of force or benefit that "elected-union-we the people" is selected to support via the committee, seniority, or position in 'organisation chart' he/she is positioned upon.

Eric Cantor, Jon Kyl challenge White House on debt - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

Eric Cantor, Jon Kyl challenge White House on debt - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

The purpose of Congress establishing a "debt ceiling" is to control the spending of the "random, killer shark, mentality of an Administration that dislikes business, disrespects the Constitution of the United States, continues to spend this nation's assets as taxpayer resources without regard to the "unseen effects" because "only government can define and solve a problem" as exemplified in: the now 'Repealed' (should our socialist President 'Allow' its repeal over the Supreme Law) - Patient Protection and Affordable Act; the "America's Financial Stability Act passed as Public Law 11-203" with [Republican assistance]; the Stimulus' of whichever number you care to identify. This while the President's czars work very hard, out of the light of legislative process, to write regulations which are consistently, "inconsistent with that supreme law and not derived from it..."exemplified by: 'Food, Cosmetic, drug act update'; internet "filtering"; mandates for unionization of private business; regulation of private trade and college schools - beyond what existing college and trade schools perform without the government.

Raise the 'debt ceiling' because this will avoid "..the question [of] the credit worthiness of the U.S. government and trigger an economic crisis..". Wonder where this Administration has been vacationing in its 'group-minded, only government can solve problems' mentality? Aren't we currently in a financial crisis; most of US(A) unemployed would say Yes; business would say 'yes' because it cannot continue to function the the government-controlled environment defined by the so-called 'stability' of 2 leading socialist's from Obama's class-thinking, external government. We cannot be anymore bankrupt than "We the People" are now! Our credit worthiness will NOT IMPROVE by raising the debt ceiling.

This ADMINISTRATION has not on wit of knowledge regarding cutting its own killer-shark attitude towards the "person and person-corporate taxpayers". There is Virtually No Method to guarantee that the Obama Administration can even identify its own contributions to the 14 Trillion and growing debt. His administration is incapable of cutting any of the 1300 Departments and Agencies which Must be cut in order to reduce government in its invasiveness far beyond the limits of "enumerated powers".

The Obama Administration is incapable of behaving responsibly in cutting any part of government; and therefore, giving them more money to spend - irresponsibly - is the height of the ridiculous. It shall lead to what is a tragedy for our posterity to live with 14Trillion in Debt... to a Catastrophe of what remains as the free market of capitalism. Raising the 'debt ceiling' could result in the further demise, status post government definition and control of financial risk-benefit of which it ignorant, but will find someone to write a software program to fix what-ever is deemed to need fixing, by the new-cost-adding commission of "financial stability' . Raising the 'Debt Ceiling' or raising the money to support more bankruptcy is a violation of Article I:8:4 uniform laws of bankruptcy. The existing 'debt ceiling' Is The Law.

Do not continue to insult "We the People" by feeding the "Obama-Socialist, Killer shark" AGAIN

Trading disobedience to the constitutions for political gain...

via Democratic Assemblymen: Fuentes, Cedillo's "it makes economic or moral sense to deny scholorships to bright illegal [aliens] (aka Dem's "immigrants"). These 'illegal aliens under legal age' who went through CA's tax-payer public education expense; and with these two Assemblymen with cohorts + Governor, now will continue via "free tax payer money as Cal-Grants" on top of the tax-payer supported college education!  Of course, this little - no economic or moral consequence "Dream Act" - doesn't consider the number of natural or naturalized immigrants Citizens who, also, cannot easily obtain a college education and are from the same nation as the illegal aliens.  Nor does the Assemblymen Fuentes, Cedillo and cohorts, respect their constituents, speaking of taxpayers as though they are non-entity, money-bags which Democratic Assemblyman do not have any morality to support...

NO ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES:  What is our bankruptcy cost now [not debt...Bankruptcy]?  How many businesses are we losing each month?   All that 'elected We the People' absence of knowledge regarding the definition of "economic and moral sense"; combined with the absence of supporting  Both US and State constitutions - or the morality of "Rule of Law' is irrelevant to Fuentes and Cedillo's personal Oath of Office.

But, there is still a "Rule of Law" in this Nation...and one of its States  as Constitutional Principles violated:
 ---"A citizen is a person who has the civil right to remain within the territory of a state and to return to it if he leaves it, the right to delegate powers to agents (that would be Fuentes - Cedillo - Brown) who comprise any government of that state, and the duty to defend that state.
---A government consists of those persons to whom certain powers held by the citizens in common are delegated, to act as agents for those [above] citizens, exercising only such powers as are delegated to them, and according to their instructions.  That delegation and those instructions constitute an extension of the basic social contract called the Constitution, which may be written or unwritten. 
---The authority of an agent or official exists only for as long and to the extent that he exercises his legitimate powers properly, and hge automatically ceases to be an agent or official if he exceed his authority.
---Defense of the state and the constitution includes defense against threats of all kinds, including invasion or attack, insurrection, criminal acts, natural or manmade disasters [like growing bankruptcy on the backs of taxpayers while rewarding persons receiving "privileges and immunities" of citizens sans citizenship, legal residence, or the responsibilites of citizenship], or public ignorance or apathy."
---THE RULE OF LAW "In a constitutional republic, the constitution is the supreme law, superior to all other public acts, whether by officials or private citizens. Any statute, regulation, executive order, or court ruling which is inconsistnet with that supreme law and not derived from it Is unconsitutional and null and void  from Inception.
---Any act performed by an agent of government which is unconstitutional is illegal, and while performing that act the person ceases to be an agent of government or to have any offricial status, regardless of what the trappings of office or color of law he may project.  It is also almost certainly a deprivation of the civil rights of someone, and therefore also a violation of one or more of the constitutional criminal laws against doing so.
---Statutes passed with the intent that they not be enforced uniformly, but at the discretion of law enforcement agents, are unconstitutional. They violate the Constitutional requirement for equal protection of the laws, and constitute an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to executive officials. ["Declaration of Constitutional Principles" by Jon Roland; www.constitution.org]

Here are the US and State Constitution violations the 'Dream Act' imposes:
Article IV:2 "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of the Citizens in the several States."   Illegal aliens have no privileges since they take no responsibility toward their duty as citizen of the United States. Illegal alien's children, until adulthood in CA Law, are under their care. The continued inadequate money for their education in college does not change just because of time spent without responsibility or answering to law of the United States or California - It is Not a Use of Taxpayer Money. Especially when cuts have to be made to the acute and chronically ill, elderly, and disabled who have been legal citizens of this state and nation. There is no reward of citizenship simply because of living under parents who are illegal. Privileges of benefits provided by taxpayers to other taxpayers including citizens unable; are not available; especially at the expense of other citizen's children growing-up legally under 'The Rule of Law'.  "---An unconstitutional statute is not a law, no matter how vigorously it may be enforced. Enforcement does not make what is enforced the law. What is enforced is a regime. In a constitutional republic, the law and the regime should coincide. If they do not, the regime is not law, but anti-law."  Illegals are just that...even spending years in the US as illegals!

CA Constitution Article I:7(b)  (b) A citizen or class of citizens may not be granted privileges or immunities not granted on the same terms to all citizens.

Privileges or immunities granted by the Legislature may be altered or revoked. AND

Article I:7(a)corresponds to Amendment XIV:1 of the US Constitution: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. .."  Illegal persons are not citizens. To be "Granted" the gift of citizenship via the privilege of taxpayer dollars; when other of the same Nation south of the border, can not and shall not be allowed is not equal protection. 

N. Webster's, "The American Dictionary of the English Language", defines privilege: "1. A particular and peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person, company or society, beyond the common advantages of other citizens. A privilege may be a particular right granted by law or held by custom, or it may be an exemption from some burden to which others are subject. 2. Any peculiar benefit or advantage, right or immunity, not common to others of the human race. Thus we speak of national privileges, and civil and political privileges, which we enjoy above other nations. We have ecclesiastical and religious privileges secured to us by our constitutions of government.  ..". Illegals as parents or children, for whatever period of time here in America, do not qualify as citizens with Privileges.  Immunities is defined as:  "1. Freedom or exemption from obligation. ..  2. Exemption from any charge, duty, office, tax or imposition; a particular privilege;..".  Illegals are not exempt from obligation, from their lawful duty as present under unlawful circumstances..they are not responsible.  Those we call 'elected- We the People" are obligated not to tax or use taxpayer's resources, to support the unlawful activities of parents and their children.  

Please note, no-one is telling illegals, any nation, to leave. Just to understand the risk - benefit of their person and their family's loss of a Citizen's "privileges and immunities".  Many Illegals have and will continue to stay here in America without any 'privileges and immunities' because they Shall Always have their "..nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property...or equal protection.."...even when they do not appreciate or understand that is why they can walk, pretty-much freely about their business. Not to say they won't be punished..as they should be.  The punishment of 'caught-you', is to respect the persons who have arrived, with just as much hardship, as any illegal; but obeyed US Law.  

Integrity of Law applies to each person, one at a time; it is from God's Law which does recognize individual, personal responsibility to God, self, family, city, state, and nation...here and in Mexico or whatever nation is involved. It is the Integrity of Law which the "Dream Act" violates.