The question is even more important than you think


What happens when Congress isn't bound by the Constitution?
I have two quotes.

The first is the Fourth and Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. You know, that pesky document that says "members of Congress shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this constitution."

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Here's the other quote, this time from the Financial Times.

Lindsey Graham, the Republican senator for South Carolina, says that many of his colleagues, including John McCain, the defeated presidential candidate, agree with his view that nationalisation of some banks should be “on the table”.

Mr Graham says that people across the US accept his argument that it is untenable to keep throwing good money after bad into institutions such as Citigroup and Bank of America, which now have a lower net value than the amount of public funds they have received.

“You should not get caught up on a word [nationalisation],” he told the Financial Times in an interview. “I would argue that we cannot be ideologically a little bit pregnant. It doesn’t matter what you call it, but we can’t keep on funding these zombie banks [without gaining public control]. That’s what the Japanese did.”

Now I will admit I am not a lawyer. But I do remember a few high school civics classes, which I assume the Senator is familiar with.

So tell me, under what section or amendment of the United States Constitution is the Congress or the President empowered to nationalize banks?

That question is even more important than you think.

Because, you see, it inevitably leads to another question.

If the elected officials of the United States do not recognize the Constitution under which they were elected, then are Americans bound to recognize the elected officials?

— NeoWayland

Posted: Thu - February 19, 2009 at 12:32 PM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved