Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1. A constitution does not create freedom. A constitution is created only to protect and
secure freedom which already exists, through forms, structure and limitations of government.
This is what our founders said in the Declaration of Independence: “to secure these rights,
governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed.” Therefore, if one’s perspective about the U.S. Constitution is that it statically
creates freedom for all the people of the states, then I could understand how he would be
shocked or angered at the suggestion that the U.S. Constitution is dead. To the contrary, we
know that freedom exists in a state of nature, created by God, as expressed in the Declaration
of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” These natural laws and rights never die. They existed
prior to 1787 and they will exist after we are gone. Thus, a distinction must be made between
natural freedom (which never dies) and a constitution (which can die).
That our government must conform its actions and intentions to these principles is confirmed
by the United States Supreme Court, by those who formed our constitutions, and by those
who helped form the very fundamental thoughts of American jurisprudence: (1) “Let the
nature and objects of our Union be considered; let the great fundamental principles on which
the fabric stands be examined.” Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264, 423 (1821). (2) “[N]o free
government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but…by a frequent
recurrence to fundamental principles.” Benjamin Kidd, Principles of Western Civilisation,
citing Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776, (London, The Macmillan Co., 1902), 511.
(3) “Once the principles of government are corrupted, the very best laws become bad and turn
Page 1 of 5
Timothy Baldwin – What is the U.S. Constitution?
against the [people of the] state.” Charles de Baron Montesquieu and Julian Hawthorne, ed.,
The Spirit of Laws: The World’s Great Classics, vol. 1 (London: The London Press), 116.
Thus, a maxim must be admitted: where the principles of freedom are abandoned, the
constitution no longer serves its constituted purpose; that is, to limit the government as the
consent of the governed demanded at its creation. And once the constituted purposes and
principles are abandoned, how could it be argued that the constitution has life? Is the form
(the constitution) greater than the substance (the principles)? Certainly not.
“[I]f the king act, with a really hostile mind, with a new to the destruction of the
whole people…that the kingdom is forfeited; for the purpose of governing and
the purpose of destroying cannot subsist together.” Hugo Grotius and William
Whewell, trans., Hugo Grotius on the Rights of War and Peace, Book II,
(Cambridge: University Press, 1853), 57–58.
4. Particular to the United States, the U.S. Constitution was voluntarily formed
as a compact by existing sovereign states with existing state constitutions. See FP
39. Despite the deceptive proposition that the States were created by Congress, the States
existed prior to and independent of any Congress, as confirmed by the Treaty of Paris in 1783
(which, by the way, was not overturned by any subsequent legal action of the states). “The
State governments, by their original constitutions, are invested with complete sovereignty.”
Alexander Hamilton, FP 31. And, “Each State, in ratifying the constitution, is considered as a
sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act.”
James Madison, FP 39.
Page 2 of 5
Timothy Baldwin – What is the U.S. Constitution?
Today, there is a fraudulent notion in America which places the U.S. Constitution above the
importance and relevance of the state constitutions and state sovereignty, despite the fact that
we were told (in efforts to get us to ratify the U.S. Constitution) that “the State governments
would clearly retain all rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by
that act, exclusively delegated to the United States.” Alexander Hamilton, FP 32. The
authoritative advocates of the U.S. Constitution confirm that even with the U.S. Constitution
ratified or with the U.S. Constitution dissolved, the states would have their own constitutions
to protect freedom and secure the blessings of liberty within that state.
It was even proposed during the 1780s that instead of one confederacy being created through
the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, several confederacies be ratified instead. See FP 2.
So, it cannot be accurately stated that the U.S. Constitution was the sole form of convenience
of the states. The U.S. Constitution was in fact an “experiment” of union, which admittedly
may not work. James Madison, FP 14. Many notable American patriots, of course,
(prophetically and correctly) believed the U.S. Constitution would in time, by constitutional
construction, become destructive to the natural rights and sovereignty of the people of the
states. Even pro-U.S. Constitution advocates warned us of the tyrannical tendency of central
governments and implored the State governments to “afford complete security against
invasions of the public liberty by the national authority.” Alexander Hamilton, FP 28.
Therefore, it must be acknowledged that the U.S. Constitution no more creates freedom than
any other government creates freedom; and that the U.S. Constitution was simply a union of
states for very limited purposes, all of which were and can be handled by the states
themselves without the existence of the U.S. Constitution or federal government.
How can the constitutional limitations of the federal courts to apply the Supreme Law of the
Land be used to justify “federal supremacy” in un-enumerated powers over the states,
contrary to the principles of the constitution? How can the constitution’s general welfare
clause be a legal justification to the federal government socializing healthcare, economics,
banks, manufacturing, and education, despite the clear intention of the ratifiers to the
contrary? How can Congress create a fiat money system without any constitutional power
whatsoever to do so? How can the President engage in an eight year war with no declaration
from Congress? How can Obama supposedly not be eligible to be President while absolutely
no one in the federal system cares? You call that a constitution alive and well!? I could go on
and on, as many authors have already well documented for generations now. The long train of
Page 3 of 5
Timothy Baldwin – What is the U.S. Constitution?
abuses is clear: the constitution has been and is being used every day against the freedoms
and rights it is supposed to protect and against the principles and trust that created it.
Thus, a political maxim must be admitted: union, through the U.S. Constitution, does not
equal freedom and can actually be destructive to freedom. Given the natural laws of
sovereignty, self-defense, self-preservation and self-government, the States may in fact be
better off not to be a part of a union that is causing their demise. More pointedly put, the
States may in fact be better off to declare the compact (the U.S. Constitution) or at least, the
federal laws creating their demise, null and void within their sovereign borders. Naturally,
this sovereign power can come in different forms, through nullification, active resistance to
federal usurpations, controlling the mechanisms used against the states, and secession.
Regardless of your agreement with these truths, the information provided is all based upon
the natural law and political discussions of those who formed the foundation of our Republic.
The fact that we do not understand them only causes tyranny to tighten its grip on us. Before
freedom will ever be restored, government will be limited, and the people will govern
themselves, the sovereigns of the states must recognize that the U.S. Constitution is not the
answer to our political and societal plight. Rather, it is the principles of freedom that provide
the answer. The time has come in America when to restore constitutional law and freedom in
the STATES, the people of the states must begin looking internally to their own powers,
sovereignty, self-defense, self-preservation, self-reliance and constitutions.
Timothy Baldwin is an attorney from Pensacola, FL, who received his bachelor of arts
degree at the University of West Florida and who graduated from Cumberland School of
Law at Samford University in Birmingham, AL. After having received his Juris Doctorate
degree from Cumberland School of Law, Baldwin became a Felony Prosecutor in the 1st
District of Florida. In 2006, he started his own law practice, where he created specialized
legal services entirely for property management companies.
Like his father, Chuck Baldwin, Timothy Baldwin is an astute writer of cutting-edge
political articles, which he posts on his website, www.libertydefenseleague.com. Baldwin is
also the author of the soon-to-be-released book entitled, Freedom For A Change, in which
Baldwin expounds the fundamental principles of freedom believed by America’s forefathers
Page 4 of 5
Timothy Baldwin – What is the U.S. Constitution?
and gives inspiring and intelligent application of those principles to our current political
and cultural standing.
Baldwin is involved in important state sovereignty movement issues, including being co-
counsel in the federal litigation in Montana involving the Firearms Freedom Act, the likes of
which is undoubtedly a pivotal and essential ingredient to restoring freedom and federalism
in the states of America. Baldwin is also a member of freedom organizations, such as The
Oath-Keepers, and believes that the times require all freedom-loving Americans to educate,
invigorate and activate the principles of freedom within the States of America for ourselves
and our posterity.
E-Mail: tim@libertydefenseleague.com
Page 5 of 5