Content on the Daily Paul is the opinion of the original poster, not necessarily of the Daily Paul, its owner, moderators.

A Single Word Changed our Country

Submitted by jzneff on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 00:39

Daily Paul Liberty Forum

Are you one of the people who feel that our government operates outside of the boundaries set up in the Constitution? I'll bet you don't know that a single word that is missing from the Constitution allows them to do that?

The word is expressly, and it's missing from the 10th amendment. If that word were in the Constitution, our country would be different.

The 10th amendment essentially says that if the power to do something isn't written in the constitution, the federal government can not do it...but certainly we do lots of things it doesn't say. It was decided a long time ago, that without the word expressly, that congress can assume "implied" powers if The Constitution doesn't specifically say they can't.
(read more)
http://www.youshouts.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=365

Well, the people should take

Submitted by Pumpkin on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 08:02. Permalink

Well, the people should take the implied meaning of the 10th Amendment as they wish. The courts are all bound by the constitution, they can not "interpret" it. When they do, they change its meaning to what ever they wish. The power of law is with the jury. It is up to a jury to convict a man or women for trespass of one rights. Jury tampering is the problem, not one word missing from the constitution. That is just weak justification for unconstitutional action, which is quite common.

It's not the people

Submitted by jzneff on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 18:35. Permalink

It's not the people's interpretation that really matters...it's the US Supreme Court.

In 1931, Sprague vs. US, The Supreme Court rejected the notion that the US government had no right to make alcohol illegal. They defended prohibition, saying that even though the 10th amendment says anything they didn't have the power to do so.

Their ruling was a strange one, because any common person reading the 10th Amendment would read it to say the feds have no business making alcohol illegal. They ruled that the 10th amendment is a truism, and adds nothing to the Constitution.

Since then, I believe 2 federal laws have been ruled to breaking the 10th amendment...even though almost all of them seem to.

Their justification in the decision included the Articles of Confederation using the word expressly and the Constitution not using the word.

—

What do you think about the war on drugs?
How about Operation Wall Street?
Shout it today!

http://www.youshouts.com/index.php

I learned something

Submitted by jjackson21 on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 01:14. Permalink

thanks for the read

I'm not entirely sure

Submitted by jzneff on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 01:19. Permalink

I need to do some more reading, but I do believe that Alexander Hamilton and his federalist a-holes dragged their heels to get the word removed during the Constitutional Convention.

Seems they knew...

—

What do you think about the war on drugs?
How about Operation Wall Street?
Shout it today!

http://www.youshouts.com/index.php