Congress has made us helpless before whoever is terrifying the populace in New Jersey, writes Andrew P. Napolitano. This is contrary to the reason for which we have government.
A drone hovering during a training program in 2017 at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia. (U.S. Air Force/Eugene Oliver, Public domain)
The skies over New Jersey have been littered with strange flying objects during the past two weeks; and the feds are either hiding the truth from terrified folks on the ground or scratching their collective heads along with the rest of us.
Since early December, there have been between 3,000 and 5,000 reports of large drones — some about the size of a pickup truck. They have three or four arms, at the ends of which are very bright lights.
The drone I saw over the northwest tip of the state appeared to come toward me and then stood perfectly still. Then — in a heartbeat — it was gone. I didn’t immediately call the police but spoke with them through back channels. The New Jersey State Police dispatched a helicopter — manned by two troopers — to pursue this beast but not to interfere with it.
As their helicopter approached, the drone fled from them and seemed to disappear.
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy — who had no use for the Bill of Rights during the pandemic four years ago — sees no threat to public safety or public peace. The White House — which must know the origin and nature of these things — also professes ignorance. President-elect Donald Trump — in this instance, a man after my own heart — opined that if this happens on his watch, he’d order the drones shot down.
? Trump addresses the drone sightings pic.twitter.com/nmgS22WXSc
— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) December 13, 2024
Don’t expect that from President Joe Biden. Remember the two weeks during which we all watched a huge Chinese “weather” balloon make its way from Alaska to South Carolina, only to have it shot down over the Atlantic? That was a manifestation of the Biden attitude about strange and terrifying flying objects.
Can folks shoot these beasts out of the sky? The uncomfortable answer is: yes and no.
Here is the backstory.
As recently as 2008, the Supreme Court has made it clear that the right to self-defense is pre-political. Stated differently, it is a natural right that existed before the government, it exists in the absence of government, it derives from our humanity and the government cannot abridge it absent due process.
It is also expressly protected by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Thus, since this natural right is akin to the freedom of speech and religion, neither legislation nor executive command nor even a constitutional change can take this right away.
Only due process — a jury trial at which the government proves personal individual fault — can interfere with a natural right. A thief who robs a bank has violated the natural rights of the depositors and owners of the bank. The thief has given up his natural right to be free and, upon conviction, loses that right for a term of years.
Short of this voluntary waiver of rights by impairing the rights of another, natural rights are real and permanent.
Please Support CN’s
Winter Fund Drive!
Thomas Jefferson recognized this when he wrote in the Declaration of Independence that we are “endowed by (our) Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” He went on to argue that the reason we have established governments is to protect our natural rights — and when the government fails to do so, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.
In the same Supreme Court opinion in which the court held that self-defense is a natural right, the late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that individuals can defend themselves using the same mechanical or technological means as bad guys do or as the government does. This was not always the case.
From 1934 until the Scalia opinion in 2008, the court had embraced the myth that the right to self-defense is collective and not individual. Stated differently, under this now rejected and farcical big-government theory, only the government can protect you.
Since the Scalia opinion, individuals can protect themselves from bad guys and from the government when it fails to protect natural rights.
Now, back to the drones over New Jersey.
The same Supreme Court that ruled that self-defense is a personal natural individual right has also ruled that all power in the federal government comes from the Constitution and from no other source. Nowhere in the Constitution did the states give up to Congress control of safety in the airspace over your house.
Scalia during a congressional hearing in May 2010. (Stephen Masker, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)
Yet, Congress has given itself the power to control air safety and then gave it away to a federal administrative agency, which is also unmentioned in the Constitution. Stated differently, Congress has purported to emasculate the powers of the states to protect the folks in the states.
This explains the reluctance of the New Jersey State Police and even the New York Police Department to disable or capture or chase away these drones.
Congress has made us helpless before whomever is terrifying the populace. This is contrary to the reason for which we have government. The states formed the federal government and not the other way around. When they did so, they delegated only 16 discrete powers to it, and they retained all other powers. Among the powers retained is public safety.
Can Congress negate the power of the states to protect us and simultaneously negate the right of all persons to protect themselves? The short answer is: NO. The lamentable answer is we have allowed Congress to do so.
Will I shoot down the next drone that flies over my home when the state claims it cannot do so and the feds tell me to mind my own business? If I did, I’d be responsible for the natural and probable consequences of such an act, including personal injury and property damage to those on the ground.
The better way to address this is for the states to chase and capture these devices, in defiance of an incompetent federal government. If they won’t, I might just take my chances with a New Jersey jury.
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, was the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel and hosts the podcast Judging Freedom. Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.
Published by permission of the author.
COPYRIGHT 2024 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Please Support CN’s
Winter Fund Drive!
Make a tax-deductible donation securely by credit card or check by clicking the red button:
I always love your podcasts, Judge Napolitano! But, in this case, I disagree. I don’t think you should shoot one down just for being in the sky near your home. The threat that justifies self-defense needs to be clear and unambiguous. We shouldn’t be allowed to shoot just because we FEEL threatened. If we can base that decision on a feeling, then somebody’s going to shoot a big tall and completely innocent black guy walking down the street because they FEEL threatened.
The person or drone, in order to be legitimately shot in self-defense, needs to have done something threatening besides just simply existing in the skies above Judge Napolitano’s neighborhood.
I don’t know if this will ease your mind any, but, I think they’re most likely US drones.
IF they were spy drones, there wouldn’t be so many. A primary objective of spies is to be discreet. Sending such large numbers of them is NOT discreet.
If they are war drones from a foreign country, they would have already done some damage. You don’t just practice or train in foreign territory. However, you do train in domestic territory.
Therefore, far and away the most likely explanation is that the US military is training up their drone pilots and, of course, lying about it.
So, the scary thing is, they’re still serious about war mongering. They haven’t accepted the multi-polar world. They still want to dominate and, knowing that the US does NOT like its soldiers coming home in boxes, they are training up on remote control fighting.
UNLESS this is some billionaire’s idea of Christmas lights.