It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do US politicians have the authority to legislate against the Constitution?

page: 1
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
As I understood it the President is sworn to uphold the Constitution. That's his role, is it not?

As I understood it, the Constitution defines what all US politicians can & can't do. Does it not?

So if they legislate in a way that contravenes the constitution have they not superseded their authority?

And would that not mean the legislation is itself invalid? Null & void?

Would it not also follow that those who acted in keeping with such legislation would be acting in contravention of the Constitution? Would not legislators and implementors both be legally culpable?

Is this just naïve? Or — in view of Anonymous' latest message — are politicians already enacting legislation which is legally invalid? And does the legislative measure itself actually constitute illegal activity on the part of the politicians?

On the other hand, the President swore an oath to The People to uphold the Constitution. Presumably he has no choice but to reject whatever violates the Constitution.

Presumably the USA is safe...




posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Does the constitution have any authority to begin with?



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
The only problem with that is; nowhere in the Constitution or within the body of laws passed since this country's inception, is there a law making it illegal for anyone to pass or enforce a law which contradicts the Constitution.

Unfortunately, we have to rely on the very ones who spend their whole day passing uncostitutional laws to put such a law into effect.

In other words; Its never gonna happen.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 





Presumably the USA is safe...


Sorry I have to disagree with that statement. This country is not safe and if we don't act now it never will be. The CONgress has literally been attempting to pass the most treasonous act since the Patriot Act. As long as these people exist within our country and within our government we are never safe.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Namaste1001
 





posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 


the point is, if you think the constitution is the guideline you want your country to be led by, to vote for the candidate you feel will be restrained and guided in office by the constitution.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Legislation or Executive Orders by our politcal leaders to intentionally nullify the U.S. Constitution (as opposed to an issue that the courts must decide); I have one word:
TREASON.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
This is what "checks and balances" are all about. Now we wait for someone to bring suit, challenge the law, etc. Just like what has happened with the health care law.

Unfortunately, if the overwhelming majority of Americans don't give a hoot (as the case seems to be), eventually no one will be left to donate money to those organizations who hire the lawyers to challenge these laws in court... etc.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Nope, it's legal for them to propose any legislation they want to. It's the supreme court's job to rule laws unconstitutional.

You know that even the constitution itself can be changed right? There is not anything preventing them from removing or changing the bill of rights. They won't do this, but there's nothing stopping them, besides the American people. However, they would need 75% of states to agree to it, there's a couple of other methods as well, none of them are easy.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Theoretically we have a system of checks and balances. If a President overrides the intent of the Founders by Exective Order, then there are recourses to that, that include losing his office.

I reiterate though, "theoretically". My personal opinion... If you have enough money, Washington will make anything you want happen. Just toss in the greenbacks, the open bar, and the call girls...

~Heff



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
They can pass whatever bit of legislation they like, it has no force or effect unless the people of the country agree it does or are too ignorant/complacent to say otherwise.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Namaste1001
 


Maybe not philisophically, but it does because it was agreed upon by our founders as a way to protect us.

from wikipedia



Generally, every modern written constitution confers specific powers to an organization or institutional entity, established upon the primary condition that it abides by the said constitution's limitations. According to Scott Gordon, a political organization is constitutional to the extent that it "contain[s] institutionalized mechanisms of power control for the protection of the interests and liberties of the citizenry, including those that may be in the minority."[7]



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 


No , Any Noncomplience with Constitutional Law by Any Federal Goverment Employee is TREASON ......Period.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by type0civ
 


It's just a bit of paper with some ink on it. Nobody alive today was around when it was signed. So does it have any actual authority? I would say no. The real authority are the people that make up the population of the country. It's their birth right that is being mortgaged by the government.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 



You know that even the constitution itself can be changed right?

But while the Constitution remains as it is, legislation that contravenes it is surely in effect illegal.

As for Namaste1001's question:


Does the constitution have any authority to begin with?

Is it not the highest law of the land? Or do you live in Orwell's 1984?



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 

A jury of peers is the only body that can overrule the US Supreme Court. Jury nullification!



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   
This guy makes an excellent point.


Want to see a piece of paper that gives me the RIGHT to rob you? You don't believe there is such a thing? Are you SURE you don't believe it?


I'm allowed to rob you!



edit on 7-12-2011 by Namaste1001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Namaste1001
 





The real authority are the people that make up the population of the country.


Which is exactly what the old paper and ink represent.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 


Being the highest law in the land is irrelevant when your country is treat as a corporation.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem
The only problem with that is; nowhere in the Constitution or within the body of laws passed since this country's inception, is there a law making it illegal for anyone to pass or enforce a law which contradicts the Constitution.

Unfortunately, we have to rely on the very ones who spend their whole day passing uncostitutional laws to put such a law into effect.

In other words; Its never gonna happen.


Fort you are an intelligent person but this statement is just false.

Article I, Section 8 clearly defines the scope of legislation and law that leaves the Halls of Congress

"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

If legislation is outside the scope of the enumerated Powers listed in Article I, Section 8 (barring Supreme Court interpretation of various clauses such as the Commerce Clause), then such legislation is in contradiction to the above quoted clause.

Now we could of course arc into a discussion about the neglect of all three branches willfully ignoring this clause and using semantics and legalese to push legislation that is contradictory to the enumerated powers vested in Congress.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join