There ought to be a law

[alan1]

If you could change, create or eliminate one law, what would it be?

I'd say potential death penalty for child abuse of anybody under 13.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No point to change ONE law.

But if I could I would create a Constitutional Amendment that REQUIRED the Government to live within its means and forced Congress to justify every law, panel, agency, action taken by them with the specific Constitutional Authority that grants the power to do so.

 

[Paulie]

The first law I would enact is the Enumerated Powers Act.

All authors of federal legislation are required to state specific constitutional authority for said bill.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'd repeal the 16th Amendment.

 

[Father Time]

Can I overturn a supreme court decision?

 

[Luissa]

I would legalize marijuana!

 

[alan1]

Can I overturn a supreme court decision?

Hypothetically, yes.

 

[Father Time]

Hypothetically, yes.

FCC vs. Pacifica then, and not just because I'm a Carlin fan.

I really fail to see how regulating what exact words you can say on TV doesn't abridge the freedom of speech.

There are some other dumb laws I'd get rid of but many of them are by state so overturning one state isn't as satisfying as getting rid of bad Supreme Court precedent.

 

[foggedinn]

There ought to be a law are the six most dangerous words in the english language.

 

[alan1]

There ought to be a law are the six most dangerous words in the english language.

The question did include the option to eliminate a law.

 

[indago]

I'd repeal the 16th Amendment.

Why?

 

[editec]

Laws against hemp.

Of course, I'm personally involved, so my choice is motivated by self interest.

 

[Ravi]

A law that would make it illegal for Republicans to reproduce.

 

[Paulie]

Yeah but it would go beyond just consumption, Ed. Those laws are hampering great industrial advancement.

They would be a close second to my Enumerated Powers choice.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I would Overturn US v. Darby Lumber

United States v. Darby Lumber Co., 312 U.S. 100 (1941)[1], was a case in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the Fair Labor Standards Act, holding that the U.S. Congress had the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate employment conditions. The unanimous decision of the Court in this case overturned several longstanding precedents, notably Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251 (1918).

This is the case that let the genie out of the bottle. After this case, the there was basically nothing the Federal Government couldn't regulate through the commerce clause.

Without this action Paul, your Enumerated Powers Act means nothing because the answer is always the same. Article I, Section 8, clause 3 - Commerce Clause.

 

[AllieBaba]

A law that would make it illegal for Republicans to reproduce.

A.k.a.: Eugenics.

Tell us something we don't know already, Nazi.

If I could have one law it would be a law which requires any law to cite it's consititutionality in its text.

Barring that, a law which would eradicate about 50 percent of the laws on the books now. That would be a good law.

 

[Ravi]

A.k.a.: Eugenics.

Tell us something we don't know already, Nazi.

If I could have one law it would be a law which requires any law to cite it's consititutionality in its text.

Barring that, a law which would eradicate about 50 percent of the laws on the books now. That would be a good law.

Your last sentence is probably true. But disallowing Republicans reproductive rights is just common sense.

 

[Father Time]

Barring that, a law which would eradicate about 50 percent of the laws on the books now. That would be a good law.

That's cheating man, it's as if you're granted one wish and you ask for more wishes.

Although randomly destroying half our laws (so long as murder, rape, robbery, damaging of property, counter fitting, arson etc. are kept untouched) is a great idea, then we can redo only the laws we actually need, which would probably end up 2%

 

[foggedinn]

There is a reason that the term there ought to be a law is so dangerous. It has to do with a theory of law that I adhere to.

Law is the devine gift of God's Word. As such, any attempt on our part to change it is setting ourselves up as God.

The will of the majority, enacted by the legislature, and signed by the chief executive is, by definition, merely the politic. We should call things by there proper names. What goes on in our state and national legislatures is politic, not Law.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A.k.a.: Eugenics.

Tell us something we don't know already, Nazi.

If I could have one law it would be a law which requires any law to cite it's consititutionality in its text.

Barring that, a law which would eradicate about 50 percent of the laws on the books now. That would be a good law.

I'd be in favor of a law that required a certain amount of time during every session of Congress to be spent in cleaning extraneous laws off the books.