Hi Donna,

Their legal approach is different and has not been tried before. First, It
puts legally passed and enforceable ordinances in place immediately and
then forces corporations (or state governments) to sue if they choose.
there is no waiting. it has been used by communities to reject fracking,
toxic sludge and cafos, to mention a few. it requires some courage, and
much citizen support -- to be sure.

and the CELDF ultimate strategy is to create state level alliances
(pennsylvania and colorado and others i cannot recall at the moment) and
then force the issue up to the highest judicial levels. this will take time
-- but it is forcing each level to publically say whether they put humans
first or corporations first, and this is somethiing they do not want to do.
 they prefer to hide behind all the existing regulatory type laws -- which
when you look at the history of the country, have been put in place by
those in power, to keep themselves in power.

i also suggest getting on Paul's mailing list (http://paulcienfuegos.com)

Fred


On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Donna Buell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Thanks, Fred.  This is interesting.  Lots of good info.
>
> I have heard of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (celdf.org).
> My understanding is that they want these ordinances in place to assure that
> a legal challenge can be brought through the court system (some
> multinational will challenge the local ordinance as a violation of the U.S.
> Constitution).  And a challenge again and again, if we need.  In the hopes
> that the U.S. Supreme Court will reverse itself.  Is this your
> understanding of the work of the CELDF?
>
> I think that’s great and I will get on the celdf.org mailing list.  But.
> But, the issue runs deep and wide throughout our legal system after a
> hundred years of SCOTUS fallacy.  I believe we need the court challenges —
> and we also need the Constitutional Amendment to take us all the way back
> to 1886 and reverse a pattern of court behavior that has corrupted the 1st
> Amendment, the 4th, the 5th, and the 14th Amendments too.
>
> In other words, we need a backup plan should SCOTUS decide to do less than
> what is needed.
>
> Thanks for the info!
>
> Best,
> Donna
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 18, 2016, at 10:59 AM, fred rosenberg <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Donna, and any others listening,
>
> There are several groups in Iowa working on what we think is a better,
> more direct way to fight the corporate dominance that has overtaken our
> country and world.  This is called the Community Rights strategy.  By now,
> over 200 communities around the country have passed these very carefully
> crafted ordinances that have directly and boldly (and legally) asserted
> that the rights of the local community supersede corporate rights. Period.
>  and that even the natural ecosystem must have legal rights to exist in
> their pure state. Most of these ordinances still stand. A few have been
> fought back, or the ordinance pulled back.
>
> There is a group in Iowa City (100 grannies) that has been investigating
> this, and also here in Fairfield. There is some interest in the quad cities
> and elsewhere in Iowa.
>
> This approach bypasses the need to 'beg' regulatory agencies and/or
> state/federal government officials to do the right thing. which is both
> time consuming, expensive, and often futile. (witness the Bakken Oil
> Pipeline situation for instance.)  It does however require the local
> citizens to rise up and understand their true political power. (see quote
> from the Iowa constitution bill of rights, at bottom.)
>
> Here are several links, for those who are interested in learning more! Or,
> feel free to write if you have questions.
>
> First, a link to the founding organization,  The community environmental
> legal defense fund. www.celdf.org. their founder Thomas Linzey has been
> here to Fairfield twice. he spoke to full house audiences, and indeed his
> initial talk was the inspiration for the Jefferson County Community Rights
> Network.
>
> Second, below is an excerpt from this article
> <http://paulcienfuegos.com/community-rights-movement-and-arc-nonviolent-social-change>
> by Paul Cienfuegos from a couple of years ago. Paul has been to Iowa 3 or 4
> times, and is coming again in the next month or so. he is a quiet, gentle,
> powerful speaker and advocate for 'we the people.' (Also, here
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Prylnj4NQ8> is a great youtube video of
> him being interviewed.)
>
> kind regards,
> Fred Rosenberg
> Fairfield
>
> A. excerpt
> The rapid growth of the Community Rights movement over the past decade is
> a powerful example of a new form of nonviolent civil disobedience never
> before attempted in this country, and which is literally changing the
> playing field under our feet. Municipal and county governments are passing
> new-paradigm laws <http://celdf.org/section.php?id=39> that are
> themselves "collective acts of municipal civil disobedience", as Community
> Environmental Legal Defense Fund <http://www.celdf.org/> Director Thomas
> Linzey calls them. Each of these new ordinances (and home rule charter
> amendments) intentionally challenges existing law, because those existing
> laws are themselves a violation of We The People's inherent right to govern
> ourselves.
>
>
> Claims of state pre-emption and corporate constitutional so-called
> "rights" are used to legalize the corporate plunder of our communities, so
> in response we act through local law-making to obstruct that violence. We
> choose to step outside of conventional law, and to exercise our right of
> self-government. We consider it our duty to amend, alter, or abolish unjust
> laws. 150 communities in seven states and climbing - there's no denying
> that a powerful new form of nonviolent civil disobedience is being born and
> tested in front of our eyes.
>
>
> Core to the strategy of what we are attempting to accomplish is to force
> the powerholders - in this case elected state officials - to come out of
> hiding and choose sides. Are our elected state officials defending the
> rights of We The People? Or do they prefer to defend the so-called "rights"
> of corporate legal fictions? Regardless of how the powerholders respond, we
> win, IF we can sustain and build momentum at the local level, and
> ultimately af the state and federal levels as well. This kind of direct
> challenge is at the heart of powerful nonviolent action. (For more examples
> of creating dilemmas for powerholders, click HERE
> <http://wagingnonviolence.org/2012/03/how-to-create-a-dilemma/>.)
>
> B. excerpt from the Iowa Constitution
>
> *ARTICLE I. - Bill of Rights*
>
> *...*
>
> *Political power.* Section 2. All political power is inherent in the
> people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit
> of the people, and they have the right, at all times, to alter or reform
> the same, whenever the public good may require it.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Donna Buell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Who is organizing around a Constitutional Amendment to clarify that
>> corporations are not natural persons and that spending money is not the
>> equivalent of free speech?  I know of a few organizations — but, for
>> example, Move to Amend does not have an Iowa state page….  Are there people
>> — natural persons — on this list working the issue?  Need some help?
>>
>> Thanks much.
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Donna
>> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>> To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <[log in to unmask]&body=SIGNOFF+IOWA-TOPICS>,
>> or visit Listserv online
>> <http://lists.sierraclub.org/SCRIPTS/WA.EXE?SUBED1=IOWA-TOPICS&A=1>. For
>> all the latest news and activities, sign up for Sierra Club Insider
>> <http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-email/insider>, the Club's
>> twice-monthly flagship e-newsletter. Listserv users are subject to the
>> Sierra Club's Terms and Conditions <http://www.sierraclub.org/terms>.
>>
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to
> [log in to unmask]
> <[log in to unmask]&body=SIGNOFF%20IOWA-TOPICS>,
> or visit Listserv online
> <http://lists.sierraclub.org/SCRIPTS/WA.EXE?SUBED1=IOWA-TOPICS&A=1>. For
> all the latest news and activities, sign up for Sierra Club Insider
> <http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-email/insider>, the Club's
> twice-monthly flagship e-newsletter. Listserv users are subject to the
> Sierra Club's Terms and Conditions <http://www.sierraclub.org/terms>.
>
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to
> [log in to unmask]
> <[log in to unmask]&body=SIGNOFF+IOWA-TOPICS>,
> or visit Listserv online
> <http://LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG/SCRIPTS/WA.EXE?SUBED1=IOWA-TOPICS&A=1>. For
> all the latest news and activities, sign up for Sierra Club Insider
> <http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-email/insider>, the Club's
> twice-monthly flagship e-newsletter. Listserv users are subject to the
> Sierra Club's Terms and Conditions <http://www.sierraclub.org/terms>.
>

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to [log in to unmask] For all the latest news and activities, sign up for Sierra Club Insider (http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra-club-email/insider), the Club's twice-monthly flagship e-newsletter.