FACT - The federal govt CANNOT by itself amend the federal constitution

[ShootSpeeders]

Judicial review requires that the CONSTITUTION BE APPLIED AS WRITTEN and if the issue is not clear then AS INTENDED BY THE FOUNDING FATHERS.

So, where was the Congress SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED TO ENACT OBAMA HELLCARE?

.

Obamacare is obviously unconstitutional and the states should have said so. Shortly after it passed the states did talk of nullifying it, but it appears they lost their nerve.

Establishing a national health insurance system is NOT one of the listed powers of conngress and that should settle it.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

OMG, where oh where do I begin,

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 03—1454
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al., PETITIONERS v. ANGEL McCLARY RAICH et al.

For example, Justice Thomas was right in Raich to refuse to stretch the interstate commerce clause to find a power granted to Congress to regulate purely local growth and consumption of marijuana.

.

there you go...unconstitutional acts of Congress are brought before the courts. Then the acts are dismissed and not enforced

okay

Excuse me fucktard, but according to the AG he STILL has the authority to prevent Coloradans from growing , consuming and distributing marihuana WITHIN the state borders,

.

Hmm...so things haven't changed since CJ Marshall and Hamilton and Adams were battling crazy ole Tommie Jefferson and Madison?

So what is your point about America?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

The very first words of the constitution after the preamble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states.".

That settles it. Neither the courts nor the feds nor bureaucrats can write laws, though they do it all the time. THINK

Administrative rules and laws are NOT legislation


next

HAHAHA. You just said laws are not legislation!!! HAHAHA

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Who Needs Congress: Legislation by Regulatory Fiat

Breitbart?

next

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[Contumacious]

For the lunatic fringe: A history lesson: Administrative law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the Communist majority:

A History Lesson; The Communist Manifesto

"The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state…"

.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The very first words of the constitution after the preamble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states.".

That settles it. Neither the courts nor the feds nor bureaucrats can write laws, though they do it all the time. THINK

Administrative rules and laws are NOT legislation


next

HAHAHA. You just said laws are not legislation!!! HAHAHA

Administrative rules and laws are NOT legislation

WIKIPEDIA: Legislation (or "statutory law") is law which has been promulgated (or "enacted") by a legislature or other governing body, or the process of making it. (Another source of law is judge-made law or case law.) Before an item of legislation becomes law it may be known as a bill, and may be broadly referred to as "legislation" while it remains under consideration to distinguish it from other business. Legislation can have many purposes: to regulate, to authorize, to proscribe, to provide (funds), to sanction, to grant, to declare or to restrict.

 

[Contumacious]

there you go...unconstitutional acts of Congress are brought before the courts. Then the acts are dismissed and not enforced

okay

Excuse me fucktard, but according to the AG he STILL has the authority to prevent Coloradans from growing , consuming and distributing marihuana WITHIN the state borders,

.

Hmm...so things haven't changed since CJ Marshall and Hamilton and Adams were battling crazy ole Tommie Jefferson and Madison?

So what is your point about America?

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."


We couldn't keep it.

We lost it to you and your Communistic brethren.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Legislating is a power granted to the Congress, it involves enacting laws.

Private lands? Read the US Constitution: no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Now try reading Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 and see what lands congress was given legislative authority over, hint it wasn't private land.

The USC provides for this: Private property can be taken for public use, with just compensation.

You are swinging at windmills

It also says that the feds can't purchase land within a State without the consent of the legislature, the property you're talking about is for instance the feds commandeer a ship during war time, they must compensate the owner. The feds have no imminent domain over any private lands.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Dante has kicked reactionary far right wing ass all over the Board.

The federalists would have generally disagreed with the likes of Shoot Speeders. They simply would have jailed Contumacious and thrown away the key.

We can see what the two above products of far right home schooling have done to the student body's ability to critically think.

 

[Contumacious]

Dante has kicked reactionary far right wing ass all over the Board.

The federalists would have generally disagreed with the likes of Shoot Speeders. They simply would have jailed Contumacious and thrown away the key.

We can see what the two above products of far right home schooling have done to the student body's ability to critically think.

Really?

I believe President Thmas Jefferson would have conferred the Medal of Honor upon one Contumacious Libertarian Freeman

"What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure. "

.

 

[OKTexas]

[

Okay genius name ONE piece of legislation that exists that was NOT passed by the Congress

Are you serious? There are countless examples. Bureaucrats and judges write laws all the time. I was recently given a warning and threatened with a fine for camping in an area the ranger said was closed to camping. There is no congressional law that said that. The National forest service just wrote the "law".

The executive can write its own regulations and rules. which require no legislation from Congress.

Don't camp where you are not supposed to camp, podjo.

That is a fucking lie, the executive can only write rules to implement legislation, period.

 

[OKTexas]

Dante has kicked reactionary far right wing ass all over the Board.

The federalists would have generally disagreed with the likes of Shoot Speeders. They simply would have jailed Contumacious and thrown away the key.

We can see what the two above products of far right home schooling have done to the student body's ability to critically think.

Really? The Dainty boy has no clue what the Constitution says, I don't think you do either, furthermore I don't think either of you give a shit what it says or the restrictions it places on the feds.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Dante has kicked reactionary far right wing ass all over the Board.

The federalists would have generally disagreed with the likes of Shoot Speeders. They simply would have jailed Contumacious and thrown away the key.

We can see what the two above products of far right home schooling have done to the student body's ability to critically think.

The board notes you never addressed the issue and just made personal attacks. Even you know you are in the wrong on this issue.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

That is a fucking lie, the executive can only write rules to implement legislation, period.

Yes indeed. The purpose of executive orders is for the president to explain how he is going to enforce the law - and that is fine. But obama simply writes new laws and calls them executive orders.

For example if obozo issued an EO saying he is going to enforce the immigration laws and direct the FBI to question companies on whether they are hiring illegals, that would be a valid EO. But when obozo writes an EO that grants amnesty to illegals ( as he did in 2012) in brazen violation of laws passed by congress, then that is not a valid EO. That is a case of obozo rewriting a law and he can't do that.

 

[TheJedi]

Excuse me fucktard, but according to the AG he STILL has the authority to prevent Coloradans from growing , consuming and distributing marihuana WITHIN the state borders,

.

Hmm...so things haven't changed since CJ Marshall and Hamilton and Adams were battling crazy ole Tommie Jefferson and Madison?

So what is your point about America?

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."


We couldn't keep it.

We lost it to you and your Communistic brethren.

.

See bolded.

This is probably a topic for another thread....an inspiration actually but the only difference between a republic and a pure democracy is that in a democracy, the minority suffers the tyranny of the majority and in a republic, the majority suffers the tyranny of the minority.

Now let's explore the definition of Oligarchy:

Oligarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos), meaning "few", and ἄρχω (arkho), meaning "to rule or to command")[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, education, corporate, or military control. Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families who typically pass their influence from one generation to the next, but inheritance is not a necessary condition for the application of this term.

Throughout history, oligarchies have often been tyrannical (relying on public obedience and/or oppression to exist) though others have been seen as relatively benign. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich,[4] for which the exact term is plutocracy. However, oligarchy is not always rule by the wealthy, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged group, and do not have to be connected by either wealth or by bloodlines - as in a monarchy.

Think on that for a while.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You first. Start with the Federalist papers. Maybe you'll get your head out of your ass.

The Federalist papers were written arguing in support of a STRONG federal government.

The anti federalists had arguments too.

Hamilton was one of the fiercest proponents of adoption of the USC even though it was more of a document to Madison's liking than his own.

The framers (not the founders) brooked compromise.

now take a hike back to your home school

The "Federalist Papers" are pretty neat archives but they were intended to be illustrations and agendas based on revolutionary propaganda. Hamilton was a walking contradiction. He was a patriot who fought beside Washington but he also admired the British centralized government. He was a federalist but switched parties (and beliefs?) when he opposed Adam's bid for reelection. The framers and the founders created the greatest document in the world. The Constitution is the law of the land regardless of the low information left's sudden interest in revolutionary history.

The Federalist Papers were written by three individuals: Hamilton (51), Madison (29) and Jay (5). They are not law, they were efforts to urge the NY Convention to ratify the Constitution. Thus they used logic intermixed with appeals to prejudice; they argued the Articles of Confederation were weak and a strong Federal Gov't was necessary to protect the nation from a strong British Navy and the ambitions of Spain.

 

[regent]

Could we have a nation if each time we changed part of Constitutional government we had to amend the Constitution? It couldn't be done. Changes will be made today and we will accept the changes, because we don't know the changes are being done or can't do anything about the changes. The Supreme Court even changes some of its decisions after they have ruled. All we can expect is to stay someplace in the Constitutional ball park.
Maybe the biggest change ever made to the Constitution without an amendment, is when the Court said they will interpret the Constitution when no Constitutional power was given for the Court to interpret?

 

[BobPlumb]

Could we have a nation if each time we changed part of Constitutional government we had to amend the Constitution? It couldn't be done. Changes will be made today and we will accept the changes, because we don't know the changes are being done or can't do anything about the changes. The Supreme Court even changes some of its decisions after they have ruled. All we can expect is to stay someplace in the Constitutional ball park.
Maybe the biggest change ever made to the Constitution without an amendment, is when the Court said they will interpret the Constitution when no Constitutional power was given for the Court to interpret?

That ballpark just keeps growing and growing.

 

[regent]

Could we have a nation if each time we changed part of Constitutional government we had to amend the Constitution? It couldn't be done. Changes will be made today and we will accept the changes, because we don't know the changes are being done or can't do anything about the changes. The Supreme Court even changes some of its decisions after they have ruled. All we can expect is to stay someplace in the Constitutional ball park.
Maybe the biggest change ever made to the Constitution without an amendment, is when the Court said they will interpret the Constitution when no Constitutional power was given for the Court to interpret?

That ballpark just keeps growing and growing.

Think of why the nation has so few amendments to the Constitution while some states have hundreds of amendments. We have been changing the Constitution since the ink dried, and are still changing it, but nicely nicely. Thousands of court cases for change and yet only 27 amendments. We will continue to change bits and pieces of the Constitution as America changes.