In light of Biden’s first few days in office, I figured I’d assess the Constitutionality of his actions. He’s done a lot, that’s for sure, and it would be good if we all had a concrete understanding of the Constitutionality or lack thereof of his actions. If we want to critique him, we better have …
Is It Constitutional?
Let’s set the record straight: nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government given any authority over ordinary crimes. Constitutionally and historically, crime fighting was left to state and local governments exclusively. Every state and municipality is unique and requires a specialized sort of crime management. Click to read more.
In the middle of riots, debates, protests, pandemics and elections, people keep asking me about the 25th Amendment. There’s a quiet sense of dread, a sense of foreboding horror in people’s manner as they attempt to unravel and unveil the truth about the 25th Amendment.
I’ll be the first to say. I don’t have all the answers, mostly because when it comes to the 25th Amendment, no one has all the answers.
That being said. I will give you some answers and also explain to you why I am not overly concerned about this new Nancy Pelosi drama.
As you well know, you, my readers are driving the topics for this “Is It Constitutional?” series. One of the most recent requests I received: is the income tax Constitutional?
So, upon research, I’ve found the answer.
Before I give you the answer though, I’m going to build theoretical foundation upon theoretical foundation. Click to read further.
There’s been a lot of talk about the Supreme Court, the Constitution, what’s Constitutional (which is a bit of a joke to me since neither political party follows the Constitution at this point), can the Court be packed, can the President appoint someone to the Supreme Court in an election year, so on and so forth.
Before you read this post, I encourage you to go read my articles explaining why one Supreme Court nomination shouldn’t be this big of a deal and why the Court now has the power that they do. In those articles I set the theoretical as well as historical foundations. Today’s article gets a bit more nitty gritty on the details. So, I’m going to step through the Constitutionality of many of the aforementioned questions and clarify a few points about the court’s power relative to that of the other two branches. Click to read further.
The idea of social security sounds nice, right? The government provides you with retirement funds once you reach a certain age. Social security is a popular federal government law, one that people on both the right and the left now want.
Is this not government’s job?
Ah, that’s the question, right… is it government’s job? is it government’s job to provide retirement funds to the elderly in the country, or provide unemployment benefits to the jobless?
I’m starting a series, hopefully lasting until the election, called “Is It Constitutional?”. I will publish these articles every Monday. We’ll take a look at current laws, executive action, judicial rulings and the like. I’ll analyze them through the lens of the Constitution. For today, we’ll be looking at a law that I’m asking about. Specifically, the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act or the HEROES Act.