Tenth Amendment - Commerce Clause
The Supreme Court was broken under FDR. In order to sever the endless cycle of SCOTUS ruling against steps needed to get America working FDR attempted to "pack the court", which would have added justices and imposed a series of age related voting structures and possibly forced retirement based upon age. The scheme was quashed, Justices either complied with Presidential directives or they retired. History clearly shows us a Federal Power rising from those SCOTUS ashes.
Today judicial activism is the norm, the power of the Presidency near an all-time high, and a Congress daily demonstrating its desire to relegate the power of individual States to an irrelevant position.
It has been reported that President Obama is exploring ways to subject the United States to United Nations and The World Court jurisdiction in various matters, including the World Criminal Court, Immigration and even Gun Control.
This is not surprising in light of the Iran Nuclear Deal. Our Republican form of government was intended to be a system of checks and balances. And no single branch was ever intended to be sunbserviant to another, and all powers are limited by the Constitution in scope and depth, and responsibility.
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution includes the Treaty Clause, which empowers the President of the United States to propose and chiefly negotiate agreements, which must be confirmed by the Senate, between the United States and other countries, which become treaties between the United States and other countries after the advice and consent of a SUPERMAJORITY of the United States SENATE.
During the administration of President Franklin Roosevelt a wholesale attempt to usurp and expand Federal powers of the Commerce Clause began in earnest, and was largely successful in quashing the Constitutional powers of the individual States.
The Tenth Amendment says:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
And through the years both Congress and the Courts have systematically expanded the powers of the individual States by
Today the United States, through it's various Bureaucracies and the activist Court system usurps Congress by imposing regulations and policies across the broad range of businesses and individuals, excluding no one. The President institutes additional law and regulation upon the American people via Executive Order, while Congress approvingly and helplessly looks on.
The entire court and judicial systems have broken down so dramatically that our Founding Fathers would find our current government quite similar to that of George III in 1775 which led to our Declaration of Independence and subsequent Revolutionary War.
The Supreme Court's decisions over the years expanding the intended meaning of Article X of the Constitution - The Commerce Clause, the creation of scores of individual departments, empowered by Congress to issue binding regulations as opposed to legal laws passed by Congress, and the Federal Court system blatantly setting aside legal Congressional law and replacing them with Supreme Court Decrees has effectively reduced the Constitution of the United States to the status of an inert historical document.
The ONLY hopes We The People have is to elect a President willing to nominate strict Constitutionalists to the Supreme Court, and for a Congress willing to pass legislation that begins to break up the vast Federal Bureaucracy and divest authority back to the States.
It was well and good Ronald Reagan exposed the bloated bureaucracy as wasteful spending, and it has been wonderful subsequent Politicans have made similar observations. But it will take an individual of extraordinary talent, insight and leadership to actually put such a proposal into action.
The current Government will only increase in scope and size while the middle class increasingly suffers as long as status quo exists. Donald Trump could be the catalyst for such an endeavor. We know Hillary will not be.
But realistically this election will determine the future for both The Constitution and our Nation.
Agree? Disagree? Please let me know. I will post most replies, but reserve the right to edit out words, phrases or thoughts that, in my sole opinion, are offensive, prejudicial or in otherwise bad taste. Ideas, opinions and words used on this site are not endorsed by any Church, organisation, business or individual listed on this website.