.
See Supreme Court hears oral arguments on Biden vaccine mandates: LIVE UPDATES
The question is, will a majority on the court apply the Humpty Dumpty theory of language to our Constitution in order to uphold Biden’s vaccine mandate?
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”
The fact is, Congress may not assume legislative powers not granted, nor delegate its lawmaking powers affecting principles, standards or general public policy, and especially not to an un-elected body. To allow Congress to delegate its legislative power is to subjugate and undermine our Constitution’s separation of powers, and likewise subjugate the guarantee to a “Republican Form of Government” in which the peoples’ legislative body has the exclusive law-making power.
See Article I, Section 1.
"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Seems to me the OSHA vaccine mandate falls within the very definition of tyranny as described by Madison:
“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny”.___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47
The fundamental question is, where in the Constitution has such an invasive power ___ one which intrudes upon the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State ___ been delegated to our federal government?
Is it not a fact the States, when framing and ratifying the Constitution, intentionally delegated defined and limited powers to the federal government they were creating, and the separation of such powers were succinctly summarized, e.g., by Madison in Federlist No. 45 as follows?
”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.
The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”
Is it not an irrefutable fact that our founders, to prevent misconstruction or abuse of our federal government’s powers, that they added a number of declaratory and restrictive clauses [our Constitution’s first ten amendments], one of which reads as follows?
”The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.”
So, where is the wording in our federal Constitution by which its Framers, and the States who ratified it, delegates power to the Executive office to enter the states and compel, under a penalty of a fine, business owners therein to force their employees to be inoculated with a foreign substance, asserted to be necessary for the public good?
Keep in mind the thoughtful words of Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law, 1858.
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void".
JWK
"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." -- Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968
See Supreme Court hears oral arguments on Biden vaccine mandates: LIVE UPDATES
The question is, will a majority on the court apply the Humpty Dumpty theory of language to our Constitution in order to uphold Biden’s vaccine mandate?
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”
The fact is, Congress may not assume legislative powers not granted, nor delegate its lawmaking powers affecting principles, standards or general public policy, and especially not to an un-elected body. To allow Congress to delegate its legislative power is to subjugate and undermine our Constitution’s separation of powers, and likewise subjugate the guarantee to a “Republican Form of Government” in which the peoples’ legislative body has the exclusive law-making power.
See Article I, Section 1.
"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Seems to me the OSHA vaccine mandate falls within the very definition of tyranny as described by Madison:
“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny”.___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47
The fundamental question is, where in the Constitution has such an invasive power ___ one which intrudes upon the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State ___ been delegated to our federal government?
Is it not a fact the States, when framing and ratifying the Constitution, intentionally delegated defined and limited powers to the federal government they were creating, and the separation of such powers were succinctly summarized, e.g., by Madison in Federlist No. 45 as follows?
”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.
The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”
Is it not an irrefutable fact that our founders, to prevent misconstruction or abuse of our federal government’s powers, that they added a number of declaratory and restrictive clauses [our Constitution’s first ten amendments], one of which reads as follows?
”The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.”
So, where is the wording in our federal Constitution by which its Framers, and the States who ratified it, delegates power to the Executive office to enter the states and compel, under a penalty of a fine, business owners therein to force their employees to be inoculated with a foreign substance, asserted to be necessary for the public good?
Keep in mind the thoughtful words of Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law, 1858.
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void".
JWK
"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." -- Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/M4FDZ6DKSJISRIRQR3F2UI5HWA.jpg)
