How we cite our quotes: (Law.Section)
Quote #1
"That all white persons, aliens, (accredited foreign ministers, consuls, or agents, their families and domestics, excepted) who, after the passing of this act, shall continue to reside, or who shall arrive, or come to reside in any port or place within the territory of the United States, shall be reported..." (Naturalization.4)
"All white persons." That's not even trying to hide racism. This is a wonderful example of tyranny in action, as it specifically refers to white people to be treated differently under the law.
Quote #2
"That it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, whenever he may deem it necessary..." (Friends.2)
Whenever the president deems it necessary. That's tyranny in a nutshell, and exactly the kind of unilateral power the colonists revolted against and designed the Constitution to prevent.
Quote #3
"the President of the United States shall make public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being males of the age of fourteen years and upwards, who shall be within the United States, and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured and removed, as alien enemies." (Enemies.1)
Hmm. Throwing people out, some as young as fourteen, without even the pretense of a jury trial? That's a little suspect.
Quote #4
"That if any persons shall unlawfully combine or conspire together, with intent to oppose any measure or measures of the government of the United States, which are or shall be directed by proper authority, or to impede the operation of any law of the United States, or to intimidate or prevent any person holding a place or office in or under the government of the United States, from undertaking, performing or executing his trust or duty, and if any person or persons, with intent as aforesaid, shall counsel, advise or attempt to procure any insurrection, riot, unlawful assembly, or combination, whether such conspiracy, threatening, counsel, advice, or attempt shall have the proposed effect or not, he or they shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor..." (Sedition.1)
Let us translate for you here. This is saying that anyone organizing against the government in any way is guilty of a crime. This is the shaky edge of what's tyranny and what's not. Should people be allowed to do this? Would a just government have any cause to fear its citizens? Where is the line drawn?
Quote #5
"That if any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished..." (Sedition.2)
This is textbook tyranny. It's like Adams looked the word up and was like, "This. Let's do this." Here, this is anything spoken against the President or Congress (but not the Vice President because that's Jefferson and who cares) is illegal. You might notice that's exactly the kind of speech the First Amendment is there to protect. You don't need a law to protect you from the government for speaking stuff they like. No one is worried about the ramifications of being like, "The President is a handsome man." This law is an attempt to strip the purpose from the First Amendment.