The Constitution is a living document, which must be interpreted in accordance with the times to remain relevant. This is the continual drone of Washington’s political elite. This phrase is championed by Democratic Party nominated activist judges as well as those activist judges are nominated by RHINOS. Lest anyone doubt, the constitution has a method for updating its language, built in. It is the amendment process. It is difficult to accomplish since it requires super majorities. This was done precisely so that the latest fad can’t change the balance of power and remove natural right.
It is a shame the judiciary has been permitted to distort the federal system. Stare Decisis has been used to make permanent this judicial activism. Courts bypass the enumerated powers limitation by citing the public welfare clause or misusing the interstate commerce clause sometimes for a good cause., but bad law even when well intended leads to future unintended consequences. One need only read some of the cases applying the Civil Rights Act to private clubs to see the intellectual jujitsus employed by the Court to reach a desired result. Ketchup moving through interstate commerce as a basis for utilizing the Interstate Commerce Clause, Really? What’s next penumbra’s of amendments? Oh, that’s been done too. See Roe vs Wade.
The next time you hear “there ought to be a law, you should ask; is the proposed law a legitimate exercise of the power of the federal government or of any government?
Does any proposed law, fall under an enumerated federal power? Does it violate any guaranteed personal freedoms. If it is a safety or educational issue, is it better addressed by a government closer to the people?
Yes, government is a use of force and as such must be used sparingly. If you use it continually, then you risk mob rule or tyranny of the majority. Tyranny isn’t limited to single dictators!
States joined together to form our union. Our Founders believed the states that formed the federal government were closer to the people and should wield governmental authority unless it is given to the national government by a listed power.
Federal power is limited. Witness the 10th amendment. If federal power is interpreted too broadly, the tenth amendment is meaningless and the Constitutional intent is defeated. If you want a more powerful federal government, secure enough support to amend the document. It has been done.
So the moral of the story is; think before you say, “ there ought to be a law”.
If you are a liberal, a conservative; how will you feel, when your adversary controls government and wields that same power in a manner you believe damages you or limits your individual freedoms? Before you bellow “ there ought to be a law “, ask critical questions.
If you feel there is no power enumerated for your law and is there enough consensus, then do the right thing, amend the constitution? If there is not enough popular clamor to amend, enjoy your God given, natural rights or use your liberty to be the change in your area, you want. Persuasion and private action may better serve your cause rather than the use of government force.
Share this:
