Applcable laws to Oath, rights (besides the US Constitution and all that is IN PURSUANCE THEREOF which is the highest law of this land:
5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take before assuming office.
5 U.S.C. 3333 requires the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law,
5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”.
18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath of office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.
The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. An EO 10450 provision specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.”
Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. So according to EO 10450 and 5 U.S. 7311, any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other then by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.
18 USC § 241 – Conspiracy against rights: If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Actually you are incorrect in this assumption: "It's the courts' job to keep telling them 'no' when they try to (or do) violate our rights."
They do take training concerning the natural rights of the people guaranteed by the US Constitution and state Constitutions (or did). They only have to know the Bill of Rights and apply it to what they are doing to know if what they are doing is lawful or illegal. They also take an lawfully required Oath that they MUST keep to actually meet the requirements of the position they are occupying - will post applicable laws.
But shortcuts bypassing pesky things like warrants, "I don't like this person's attitude so I am going to teach him a lesson", unlawful orders from "superiors" or "officers of higher rank", unlawful presidential orders - for which THEY can be/and have been held accountable (yes, there are precedents and yes, presidential orders can be and have been found to be unlawful), make it easier to do what is unlawful here because it is "easier" at that time.
Mine are held also. But I figure it is because I quote the US Constitution, laws that apply, even the FBI site itself. Don't forget, at this time they can be unlawfully shut down for allowing free speech, so I understand them being careful.
If you want fast (yet not always correct) "justice" there are many countries in this world that has that, with Dictatorial Tyrant countries usually being the quickest to "implement" corrections on any who displeases them.
The USA was created so that the people are protected, because in all countries throughout history who quickly distribute their brand of justice many innocents paid with their lives. Study history - real history.
This country was founded on the radical concept that individuals have natural rights that cannot lawfully taken away or modified. That PROVING that the person being charged is extremely important, requiring: a reason for thinging they might be guilty of a crime, lawfully signed warrants describing the crime/item/area to be searched & specifically what looking for, lawful warrant for spying/tracking/serching/ etc, not incriminating oneself, representation, innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law to be judged by ones peers - remember the charges itself - against the person - is/are also being tried by that group of jurors; that it is not only guilt or innocence of the person but is the "law" one we even want in our nation (called jury nullification), etc.
No, the police do not need to be on an "equal footing to the criminals" in the manner you are meaning. They are on an equal footing: training, weapons, technology, etc - but the USA is NOT a "police state" like Nazi Germany, China, Russia, etc where they (police, military, representatives, bureaucrats, guy next door make the decision of life and death, guilt or innocence - not LAWFULLY anyway. Nor do most Americans want that type of life here.
This is the ONLY nation where individual rights are PROTECTED by the supreme law of this land; the US Constitution and all the is in PURSUANCE THEREOF it. Where it is the peers who decide guild or innocence, not a cop, military, representative, etc.
Read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights, notice that it adds ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS with FURTHER DECLARATORY AND RESTRICTIVE CLAUSES on the federal government to the US Constitution (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
RIGOROUS OBEDIENCE to the Constitution of the United States; (caps are mine)
Respect for the dignity of all those we protect;
Uncompromising personal integrity and institutional integrity;
Accountability by accepting responsibility for our actions and decisions and the consequences of our actions and decisions; and
Leadership, both personal and professional.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by KBright.