Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Medicinal marihuana and GCA 68 | Main | MSNBC and right to carry »

Congress and the Constitution

Posted by David Hardy · 23 March 2010 01:43 PM

Rep. John Conyers explains that the healthcare bill is constitutional under the Constitution's "good and welfare clause", adding "I’m chairman of the Judiciary committee, as you know."

The inmates really are running the asylum...

16 Comments | Leave a comment

kalashnikat | March 23, 2010 5:06 PM | Reply

Tar.
Feathers.
Rail.
Conyers.

(some assembly required)

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | March 23, 2010 5:19 PM | Reply

Maybe Conyers, the great legal scholar, should have given his wife a little free legal advice. You know, something like DON'T TAKE BRIBES, STUPID.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Conyers#Bribery_conviction_of_wife.2C_Monica_Conyers

What a tool.

Jim | March 23, 2010 7:21 PM | Reply

And Obama is a constitutional scholar. LOL!

Flight-ER-Doc | March 23, 2010 7:54 PM | Reply

Any chance that he'll lose his district after the census? Might be a good outcome

W W Woodward | March 23, 2010 9:36 PM | Reply

“The good and welfare clause? Sure, why not? As Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida said lately, “We make ‘em up as we go along.”

[W-III]

James N. Gibson | March 24, 2010 1:31 AM | Reply

I hate to break it to the world, but if the issue is the government in the past forcing every man in the country to buy something, the 1792 militia Act fits the bill. It required all able bodied White men (essentially all the people who could vote and or own property at the time) to buy a musket, with bayonet, and of a particular caliber. And if the man didn't do this he would be fined until he complied with the law.

Granted the gun controlists and the progressives say the law was never enforced and ignored by 1800. But I have found amendments to this law from the early 1790's to the last in 1820. Thus, it can be proven it was enforced for over three decades (it actually ceased to be enforced by most States in the 1840s). Granted it was a State revolt lead by Massachusetts that finally ended enforcement. But it was done by the founding fathers.

Chuck Young | March 24, 2010 4:21 AM | Reply

Just as a point of differentiation, I do not think the law required the purchase of anything but instead that enrolled members of the militia had to provide themselves with certain items.

"That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.
(http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm)"

David E. Young | March 24, 2010 8:27 AM | Reply

Congress was specifically given authority to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia under Article 1, Section 8.

Historically in America, providing for arming the militia was understood to mean that all of the able-bodied free men (not just those required to train) would be required to obtain their own arms. Virtually every American colony (except Pennsylvania) had required that action because they relied upon the free adult male population to defend the colony (slaves of course excepted).

There is no constitutional authority over health care or eduction provided in the Constitution. Congress was not even trusted to train the militia by the either the Antifederalists or the Federalists, much less to provide eduction for all Americans or delve into and make descisions regarding the personal life of everyone.

Per the Tenth Amendment, power over these areas is reserved to the states or to the people until the Constitution is amended.

W W Woodward | March 24, 2010 9:24 AM | Reply

How would John Conyers know if the Health care bill was Constitutional or not?

Wasn't he the guy who made the statement a few weeks ago that he doesn't bother reading bills before he votes on them?

[W-III]

Flight-ER-Doc | March 24, 2010 9:33 AM | Reply

I think it's time that term limits, age limits, and basic competency testing be a prerequisite for election to federal office.

Time for a Constitutional Amendment.

Oh, while we're at it, a method for the electorate in a state to recall it's federal legislators.

Pro 2A Leftist | March 24, 2010 1:59 PM | Reply

How about requiring our law makers to assert, under penalty of perjury, that they have read and understand the legislation on which they are voting.

Jim | March 25, 2010 8:56 AM | Reply

We don't need standards for members of Congress so much as we need them for voters.

Mayor Joel Stoner | March 25, 2010 11:04 AM | Reply

U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8
"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that
Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;"

When was this part of the constitution changed? The US Army has
existed and been funded for a lot longer than 2 years.

James | March 25, 2010 11:15 PM | Reply

Joel - the Army budget is voted on each year, the intent was that Congress would always have a veto over the Army by being able to cut off funding, since no money could be budgeted to the Army more than two years in advance. The downside is it REALLY messes with major procurement contracts... And it sucks to be in the military when Congress is having a budget fight and is late passing one.

Ivy Mike | January 23, 2013 7:35 AM | Reply

RE: no Appropriation: It doesn't say "renewed;" it says, simply, "no." Temporarily raised "Armies" (note the plural) were meant to be just that -- temporary, i.e., limited to two years. Any other interpretation logically allows a Standing Army. We already know that the 2A Militia was meant to be a "Switzerland"[Jackson, 1791] model citizen-militia defense as a "substitute"[Hamilton, Federalist 29] to "prevent the establishment of a standing army."[Gerry, 1789]

Ivy Mike | January 23, 2013 7:38 AM | Reply

Furthermore, to read "renewed" into "no" relies on two major errors: A. It ignores the simple language of the Constitution, and the warnings of the Founding Fathers that a permanent Army would be an "engine of oppression" and "the greatest mischief." B. It implies that the Constitution's authors were preoccupied with financial accounting trivia.

Leave a comment