Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.
An article in the Washington Post today relates how Supreme Court justices are spending the early days of the latest session parsing the language of various statutes to determine the merits of the constitutional questions arising from them. One day, says Robert Barnes, author of the piece, the definition of “file” is debated; the next day it’s “unavoidable” that must be defined in constitutional context. Later in the week, the justices pepper counsel with questions over the interplay between verb and adverb in the phrase “necessarily implies.” On that point, Chief Justice John G. Roberts laments, “…the adverb points one way and the verb points another.”
Late last week a federal judge ruled that according to the settled case law undergirding the jurisprudence of the Commerce Clause, the individual mandate of ObamaCare is constitutional.
The vigorous and timely advocacy of the enforcement of the Tenth Amendment has been well chronicled in the pages of The New American and elsewhere. There are, in fact, organizations devoted exclusively to that commendable task. While no constitutionalist worthy of the distinction can doubt the vital nature of that mission, there is another amendment whose prominence in recent headlines must also concern those dedicated to the advancing of constitutional principles of freedom and good government — the 17th Amendment.
Not a single news broadcast passes without mention of the so-called “Tea Party” and its rise to political prominence or the imminent toppling of the Establishment that will be caused by that increasing power. Candidates from Delaware to Kentucky to Colorado to Alaska are banking on the spending power of the Tea Party’s newly minted political capital, and all of that makes for good copy.
On September 9, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the injunction against Hazleton, Pennsylvania’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act that was handed down by District Court Judge James Munley on July 26, 2007.
On September 20, a meeting will convene at the United Nations Headquarters in New York to review progress made by member nations on the achievement of the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDG). The MDG were derived from the eight chapters of the United Nations Millennium Declaration signed in September 2000. The date set for complete and worldwide reaching of the eight goals is 2015.
Many of the nearly 50,000 combat troops waking up in the same Iraqi bivouacs would be surprised to learn that the “final combat brigade” has left Iraq and that Operation Iraqi Freedom has ended.
A vituperative debate rages over the propriety of building a mosque near Ground Zero. President Obama stepped into the ring by obliquely promoting the right of Muslims to worship when, how, and where they please, even in Manhattan, even post-9/11.
Mark Twain, upon hearing that his obituary had been erroneously published, told a reporter, “Reports of my death are exaggerated.” Lately, there has been a similarly premature concert of requiems sung over the admittedly emaciated body of our founding charter. Although the enemies of liberty, foreign and domestic, have enjoyed some success in extracting the vitals from our body politic and the Constitution that is its lifeblood, there remains a noticeable, pulse and it is not time to pull the plug.
The clouds of a constitutional crisis are being seeded by the Left and the Right and are reaching the point of saturation. This atmospheric manipulation will likely result in a flood of calls for a modern-day constitutional convention that will drown the inspired work of our Founding Fathers unless immediate steps are taken to build impenetrable levees around our founding charter.