Breaches of the Constitution

[Iudicious]

I'm trying to make a list of breaches of the constitution by the U.S. government, and exactly how they are breaches. I'm not personally very knowledgeable about the constitution (never even read the whole thing), so I'm having problems with this. I need the list for a resolution for a resolution for a congress debate that my friend and I are working on. He's the one with more knowledge of the constitution though, and I only have until Monday, so I don't have the time to seek out all the breaches and explain exactly how they are breaches (until after the resolution is turned in).

Any examples are useful and welcome.

[DavidOdden]

One example was the Communications Decency Act, which in Reno v. ACLU was struck down as unconstitutional (violating the First Amendment). The way to find these is to look at Supreme Court rulings, in the syllabus at what is "held", and see if it says "This law violates such and such part of the Constitution". I don't think there is a list -- it would be long. That case will lay out the reasoning.

[Iudicious]

One example was the Communications Decency Act, which in Reno v. ACLU was struck down as unconstitutional (violating the First Amendment).

I need examples that are in place now that breach the constitution. For example, if government provided healthcare is unconstitutional, I need to know the exact ways it's unconstitutional.

[Grames]

I'm not personally very knowledgeable about the constitution (never even read the whole thing), so I'm having problems with this.

I don't think anyone here should be doing your homework for you. Go read the goddamn Constitution.

[PatriotResistance]

I'm trying to make a list of breaches of the constitution by the U.S. government, and exactly how they are breaches. I'm not personally very knowledgeable about the constitution (never even read the whole thing), so I'm having problems with this. I need the list for a resolution for a resolution for a congress debate that my friend and I are working on. He's the one with more knowledge of the constitution though, and I only have until Monday, so I don't have the time to seek out all the breaches and explain exactly how they are breaches (until after the resolution is turned in).

Any examples are useful and welcome.

It would be 1000 times easier to compile the list of things the government has done that ARE constitutional.

Really, though, most things boil down to the interpretation of the general welfare clause and the interstate commerce clause. You would do well to research both of those. Here are a couple quotes by founding fathers which "prove" that the general welfare clause does not give the fed carte blanche to do anything it pleases.

"With respect to the words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." – James Madison

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” – Thomas Jefferson

Edited September 12, 2009 by PatriotResistance

[Rearden_Steel]

I sometimes wonder how far we will have to go before the majority of the country will take notice.

[All experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.]

-- The Declaration of Independence

[Iudicious]

I don't think anyone here should be doing your homework for you. Go read the goddamn Constitution.

Not homework.

The intention is to read the goddamn Constitution.

I'm asking for help identifying specific examples, because I haven't had the chance, nor do I have the time now, to find and fully assess a number of examples.

I'm not just coming here and expecting people to do all the work for me - I've been looking on my own, and I still have to write the resolution as well. It's not like I came here and posted expecting people to do my work for me. I came here because I expected, from my experience with people here, to find people who are more knowledgeable on the subject than I am and who may be willing to help.

I didn't figure it would hurt to try asking. Apparently it hurts some people.

Really, though, most things boil down to the interpretation of the general welfare clause and the interstate commerce clause. You would do well to research both of those.

Someone else recommended that I read those same parts as well, if I remember. I'll pay (even more) attention to them now. Thanks.

Edited September 12, 2009 by Iudicious

[Steve D'Ippolito]

Also check article I, Section 8 which lists out the powers Congress *does* have, and the ninth and tenth amendments.

[DavidOdden]

I need examples that are in place now that breach the constitution. For example, if government provided healthcare is unconstitutional, I need to know the exact ways it's unconstitutional.

In order to do that, you have to have an actually theory of interpretation. One widely-known theory of interpretation is Scalia's Originalism, which for some reason has some element of credibility among Objectivists. Tara Smith dismantles Originalism in this article, from an Objectivist perspective. Hopefully, there will be a forthcoming article by her that homes in on the role of "purpose" in a theory of objective interpretation.

The problem of not integrating the concept of purpose into a theory of interpretation is probably clearest in the Necessary and Proper Clause, aka the Basket Clause. Since the Constitution lacks a clear statement regarding the purpose of government, it is easy to interpret the General Welfare Clause as actually sanctioning the Welfare state. If you can't definitively narrow down the objective meaning of that clause so that it isn't a sanction for the rampant federal meddling that we see now, then you can't argue that federal control over speed limits or health insurance is unconstitutional. If you don't have an objective theory of literal interpretation that competes with Scalia's Originalism -- a theory that doesn't devolve to subjectivist "legislative intent" theory -- then you have no basis for saying with is constitutional and what is unconstitutional.

[aequalsa]

Regarding interstate commerce, There is a case being tested in Wyoming right now with regard to gun rights. They way the feds get involved in guns is through interstate commerce. The parts are made in different states and the gun is not necessarily sold in the place it is assembled in, therefore they can do as they please with it. The Wyoming case is testing whether they can regulate a gun that is completely built and sold in Wyoming.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/j...l-powers/print/

The problem you will likely run into with abuses of the constitution is that they are accomplished by way of that 5 year old gimmick where they stick a finger a half inch from your face and scream- "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!"

Anyone with a 6 year old mentality realizes that the invasion of your space is an act of aggression itself and the technicality of having not actually touched you is meaningless. You are far more inconvenienced by the invasion then you are an actual touch.

The kilo case is another example whereby eminent domain used to steal homes to build wal-marts is viewed as perfectly constitutional.

Or, the Michigan law school legalized discrimination case, and more recently, the new racist supreme court justice's case with the new Hampshire firefighters are examples of this.

you might also look into the fact that the 9th and 10th amendments, by far the biggest limitations on our federal government, have been almost wholly ignored by the courts for our entire history.

Hope that helps.

You really should read the goddamn constitution by the way. It's generally a good policy to read it occasionally so you don't start believing the 5 year olds lies.

[DavidOdden]

The problem you will likely run into with abuses of the constitution is that they are accomplished by way of that 5 year old gimmick where they stick a finger a half inch from your face and scream- "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!"

That's a very good characterization of modern legal practice.