Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Constitution & Congress: Where’s their power to get involved in Schiavo case?
U.S. Constitution via House of Representatives website ^ | 3/21/05

Posted on 03/21/2005 12:05:39 PM PST by Wolfstar

United States Constitution

Article I. Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;

Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, byCession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

Clause 18: 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.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: constitution; delegated; houseof; power; representatives; schiavo; terri; terrischiavo; us
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 561-569 next last
To: the herald

FED JUDGE ORDERS [SCHIAVO"S] FEEDING TUBE REPLACED

Well, there you go, herald. Your heros the judges have spoken.


261 posted on 03/21/2005 1:39:39 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

So who SHOULD be in the business of euthenasia? Who?


262 posted on 03/21/2005 1:41:01 PM PST by the herald (Freeeeeeeeeedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: Military family member
I believe it works the other way; I think the Constitution authorizes Congress to do certain things as opposed to restricting them from what they can't do. In other words, if the authorization isn't spelled out in the Constitution, Congress can't do it. They cannot just do anything they think of merely because those things aren't restricted. "

I don't actually know if the Federalist Papers state that. Probably they do. It is my understanding of our Constitution, though. I surely hope it's the correct understanding, too, because if I'm wrong, we're at the mercy of our government by the intent of our founding fathers as well as through the excesses of our elected officials.

263 posted on 03/21/2005 1:41:53 PM PST by Sam Cree (Democrats are herd animals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: FlipWilson

Or perhaps we instead curtail the rights of the criminals. Because that's where you and I agree.


264 posted on 03/21/2005 1:42:46 PM PST by the herald (Freeeeeeeeeedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
Why are you surprised?

The abject nihilism of the Third Reich didn't start with Hitler. The foundation for the Holocaust was already in place under the Wiemar Republic in the 1920s when Germany passed its first euthanasia laws.

265 posted on 03/21/2005 1:46:52 PM PST by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: StoneColdGOP

Congress is responsible for making the laws, and can so at any time. Judges must obey the law Congress makes. Got it?


266 posted on 03/21/2005 1:46:52 PM PST by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar

You left out Article III, Section 1. And in Section 2, you will note that the Federal courts may hear any case having a Constitutional argument. If you will read further the legislation passesd yesterday, the legislation requires the case have a basis in the Constitution. Presto. It's easy to find the power.


267 posted on 03/21/2005 1:46:57 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Not my heroes. Just wait five years for the DemocRats to turn this one on us. VICTORY FOR BIG GOVERNMENT!


268 posted on 03/21/2005 1:47:16 PM PST by the herald (Freeeeeeeeeedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

"What's a hypothetical people?"
"Do you mean, "What's a hypothetical person?"

You tell me what you meant. You wrote it.


269 posted on 03/21/2005 1:48:34 PM PST by Smartaleck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: holdonnow
I heard another person say that Congress cannot pass a bill of attainder, which is true, but a bill of attainder has nothing to do with this case, either. Such bills are for punishment, not to protect life.

A bill of attainder has nothing to do with this case only because Congress didn't judge from the Capitol, instead simply playing with jurisdiction. It would have been a bill of attainder if Congress had said to resume feeding or give guardianship to her parents (who would resume feeding), because that would be depriving Michael Schiavo of his legal rights as her guardian.

270 posted on 03/21/2005 1:48:48 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
"'Subordinate' may not have been the correct word, but the federal court system is "inferior" to Congress."

How can you discuss our system of government, built on three separate but equal branches, and debate that one may be inferior to the other?

Read again...there are inferior courts because there is a Supreme Court.

271 posted on 03/21/2005 1:49:15 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: the herald
So who SHOULD be in the business of euthenasia? Who?

Do you really think anyone should be?

272 posted on 03/21/2005 1:49:17 PM PST by katnip (I'll hear the appeal at 3pm, but in the meantime, go ahead with the execution - rockinonritalin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: the herald

There is a conservative principle here, and it is this: This case was decided on the basis of judicial activism. The judge found that she was PVS by judicially expanding the definition of PVS. He then judicially expanded the definition of extraordinary life sustaining measures to include food and water, which I think anyone would argue is a basic need, not extraordinary.

Having made those two factual conclusions, he then arrived at the result that he wanted to arrive at from the outset, namely that she should die.

Maybe it's time to allow this kind of euthanasia, but NOT by judicial fiat. And here, we've got the absolute worst situation, where the governmental body that is SUPPOSED to be making these decisions, i.e. the legislature, has been blocked out of the process altogether.

That's not conservatism.

What's really happening here is that the Democrats who have been thrown out of the legislature are trying to regain control over the government by use of the courts, which are populated by trial attorneys who are far more liberal than the general public. That's not democracy.


273 posted on 03/21/2005 1:50:14 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

Isn't life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, mentioned somewhere in the constitution? In fact, isn't the safe guarding of those God given rights, pretty much the sum and total of what that document is all about? What I want some genius to show me, is some mention of a right to privacy in the Constitution. You know that secret place that only liberal activist judges know about, where they found the right to legally murder 45 million unborn Americans, maybe even a few visiting unborn foriegners. That secret Chamber in our Constitution where our founding fathers stashed all the invisible ammo that liberal judges coming centuries later would need to shoot that sacred document so full of alleged holes that every thing they themselves despised, could be driven through it and enslave their heirs in worse tyranny than that from whence they themselves had first fled and then in a bloody war repelled from these blessed shores.


274 posted on 03/21/2005 1:50:59 PM PST by F.J. Mitchell (Hillary Rodhamclinton is phonier than a three dollar bill clinton.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: the herald

Ok, but lets first start by curtailing the criminals rights rather than curtailing Terri's first.


275 posted on 03/21/2005 1:51:10 PM PST by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar

When the judges are corrupt and morally bankrupt congress can have its say. Congress is the supreme authority--says so right in the constitution.


276 posted on 03/21/2005 1:52:32 PM PST by Cruising Speed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the herald

If euthanasia is going to be legal, it's got to be approved by the legislature. But it has not been--at least not in the case where the patient is not in a persistently vegetative state.


277 posted on 03/21/2005 1:52:38 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Logical me
"Judges must obey the law Congress makes."

So, Congress can make laws that are unconstitutional and the Courts have no say so over them?

Why do we need Courts then?

Where do people go to protest miscarriages of justice by their legislature?

Logical you?

Hardly.

278 posted on 03/21/2005 1:52:41 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: HitmanNY
Try the Federal due process provision of the USC made applicable to the states by the 14th Amendment.

Not specific enough. There has to be particular violation of particular rights. You can't just go into federal court and claim that your due process rights were violated. You have to spell it out, make a case. I've read the Schindler's complaint, and it looks empty. They're grasping at straws.

279 posted on 03/21/2005 1:54:20 PM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: LauraleeBraswell
Nice job on this thread. I see that you and the bestselling author/Constitutional scholar were on the same page.


...you should've just ignored Blzbba's CAPS comment though.

280 posted on 03/21/2005 1:54:21 PM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 561-569 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson