Resolution to remove U.S. District Court Judge Max O. Cogburn Jr. for Perjury
Whereas, on May 8, 2012, the citizens of North Carolina voted overwhelmingly to approve an amendment – the Marriage Amendment – to the state constitution, which reads as follows:
Sec.6. Marriage. Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts. (2011-409, s. 1)
Whereas, the NC state constitution provides two ways in which it can be amended: (1) by a convention of the people; or (2) by legislative initiative; and
Whereas, historically, North Carolina’s constitutional amendments have come by legislative initiative (i.e., a proposal from the General Assembly); and
Whereas, the State Constitution sets forth the procedure by which the General Assembly may initiate and the people may ratify or reject an amendment, including prescribing the time and manner the proposed amendment is to be submitted to the voters:
Whereas, marriage (its definition and its regulation) is a traditional STATE issue, under its inherent state sovereign police powers (to regulate for the health, safety, welfare, and morality of its people; the federal government has NO such police powers); and
Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, by its plain and simple language, ensures that the federal government shall not infringe upon state powers and hence never encroach upon state issues:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Whereas, the Preamble to the Bill of Rights (which many states insisted upon before agreeing to be bound by the Constitution) articulates the unequivocal reason for the amendments:
The Preamble to The Bill of Rights:
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; ….
Whereas, the People of North Carolina and their state legislature have rightfully and legally amended the state constitution; and
Whereas, on July 28, 2014, the federal 4th District Court of Appeals ruled 2-to-1 that Virgina’s “Marriage Amendment” (adopted by the voters in Virginia by ballot in 2006) is unconstitutional – the first federal court ruling on this issue to affect the South; and
Whereas, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals includes North Carolina (it hears appeals from the nine federal district courts in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina); and
Whereas, Federal District Court Judge Max O. Cogburn Jr., from the Western District of North Carolina, on October 10, 2014 ruled on an issue here in North Carolina that the Federal Judiciary has no power to rule on; and
Whereas, Judge Cogburn did willfully and with malice violate his Federal Oath of Office and committed perjury in open court; and
Whereas, Judge Max O. Cogburn took an Oath of Office which states:
“I, ____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ____________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
Whereas, Judge Cogburrn lives and resides in the State of North Carolina and is bound by the laws thereof; and
Whereas, North Carolina General Statute 14-209 states the following:
§ 14-209. Punishment for perjury.
If any person shall willfully and corruptly commit perjury, on his oath or affirmation, in any suit, controversy, matter or cause, depending in any of the courts of the State, or in any deposition or affidavit taken pursuant to law, or in any oath or affirmation duly administered of or concerning any matter or thing whereof such person is lawfully required to be sworn or affirmed, every person so offending shall be punished as a Class F felon.(1791, c. 338, s. 1, P.R.; R.C., c. 34, s. 49; Code, s. 1092; Rev., s. 3615; C.S., s. 4364; 1979, c. 760, s. 5; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 47; 1981, c. 63, s.1, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1202; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
Therefore, be it Resolved that we (insert your group name) do hereby demand the immediate removal of Federal District Court Judge Max O. Cogburn from office and charge him with the crime of Perjury; and
Therefore, be it also resolved that we do hereby demand impeachment proceedings be started immediately against Federal District Court Judge Max O. Cogburn Jr..
Respectfully submitted by SilenceDogood2010 this Eleventh Day of October in the Year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Fourteen.