Monday, August 06, 2012

Streamlining Tyranny

Maybe if they got rid of unconstitutional offices, they wouldn't need to make the approval process more efficient. [Read]

[Via DMJ]
Posted by David Codrea at 8/06/2012 11:29:00 AM

3 comments:

Mark Roote said...

While this is another slap in the face to our founders, don't the state legislatures have to approve any amendments to the Constitution, Even though the US House and Senate have approved this? Rewriting (or amending) the Constitution without the approval of a majority of the states is a change of the terms of the contract that each state signed to join the Union. Wouldn't that make the Union and/or the Constitution null and void if they try to do this without each states agreement?

8/06/2012 11:54 AM
Crotalus said...

Interesting thoughts. I wonder if this was the driving force behind the South's secession?

8/07/2012 6:43 AM
W W Woodward said...

What the congress did is not unconstitutional. See Art. II, § 2, ¶ 2, "… ; but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, 1) in the President alone, 2) in the Courts of Law, or 3) in the Heads of Departments.” [My numbering and parentheses]

What the congress did do was to open a door for possible additional usurpations of power not only by the president but also by the courts and the various dept. heads in the federal bureaucracy. The word twisters will eventually discover, with the collaboration of the courts, that they can re-interpret the phrase “inferior Officers” to mean just about anything or anybody they please. This time the congress specified the inferior officers/offices that would be affected. Next time … ???

[W3]

8/07/2012 5:59 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)