Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Liberal Judges Wiped Out A Key Clause Of The Constitution (Contract Clause)
Forbes ^ | George Leef

Posted on 06/19/2017 11:17:09 AM PDT by reaganaut1

mericans who have read our Constitution might recall the words saying that state governments may not “impair the obligation of contracts.” Yet they frequently rewrite or dissolve contracts when doing so is “good politics” – demanding that employers pay current workers more money or face punishment, for example.

Once a star in the Constitution’s plan for liberty and limited state power, the Contract Clause is now almost completely forgotten. Vanderbilt Law School professor James W. Ely, Jr. tells that unhappy story in his book The Contract Clause: A Constitutional History.

“Inserted into the Constitution without extensive debate,” Ely writes, “the Contract Clause was clearly prompted by the sour experience with state debt relief laws during the Post-Revolution Era. It was grounded in the premise that honoring contractual commitments served the public interest by encouraging commerce.”

Unfortunately, like several other key constitutional provisions, the Contract Clause eventually fell victim to judicial interpretations that, by the latter stages of the New Deal, rendered it almost a dead letter. Ely’s book gives the reader a fascinating account of the “roller-coaster ride” of this clause.

The young American nation developed a commercial economy in which the enforceability of contracts for land, goods, and services was crucial. But, as John Marshall observed, the state legislatures were inclined to “break in upon the ordinary intercourse of society, and destroy all confidence between man and man.” In an attempt to stop that, the Constitution’s drafters wrote Article I, Section 10 to read, “No state shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts.” (In the same section, states were forbidden to issue paper money or enact ex post facto laws.)

(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: contractclause
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last
To: reaganaut1

The democrats liberal progressive social believe the Santa Clause is right there in the U.S. Constitution. The two words they take out of context.

...general welfare.

The “Santa Clause.”

5.56mm


21 posted on 06/19/2017 2:44:19 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

adhesion contracts are set aside based on monopoly or gross inbalace of bargaining.

ie it was commonly used when people had no rights whatsoever in tiny fine print contracts that were by design set up so the corporation decided when you were in breach and had the right to admit your breach on your behalf under the contract.


22 posted on 06/19/2017 2:51:35 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godebert; Jim 0216; reaganaut1; Ray76

Nothing better illustrates the soft/hard concept than the different treatment of Religious Liberty in the 1st Amendment, and the right to keep and bear arm in the 2A.

The various Christian sects never presented an electoral threat to congressmen since scotus began its jihad against Christians in the 1950s. Ergo, the elimination of public Christianity.

OTOH, while most congressmen would like to ban private guns, they know that any attempt to do so means their electoral death.

Going in a different direction, it is why the 17th Amendment must go. Return the states to the senate and watch the return of the 9th and 10th Amendments.


23 posted on 06/19/2017 3:19:24 PM PDT by Jacquerie (ArticleVBlog.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LS

Ping!


24 posted on 06/19/2017 3:41:51 PM PDT by Albion Wilde ("We will be one people, under one God, saluting one American flag." --Donald Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216
reinstating the Constitution as written

Point taken but the Constitution does not need reinstatement. The Constitution constituted a country and since nothing occurred to unconstitute the country the constitution doesn’t need reinstatement.

The only thing necessary for the Constitution to function as the founders envisioned is to elect representatives who honor their oath to uphold, defend, and protect it.

25 posted on 06/19/2017 5:12:36 PM PDT by MosesKnows (Love Many, Trust Few, and Always Paddle Your Own Canoe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie; Godebert; reaganaut1; Ray76

To recover our Free Constitutional Republic, we need to drill down to and destroy the modern Leftist perversions that have illegitimately given the feds the unconstitutional tyranny they now exercise.

The four big Leftist perversions of the Constitutional I have identified are

1) the Incorporation Doctrine,
2) the sweeping expansions of the Commerce Clause,
3) the wresting of the Necessary and Proper Clause, and
4) the sweeping expansion of the scope of the Judicial Branch beyond individual cases and controversies

The “Incorporation Doctrine” is the perversion that relates specifically to the first ten amendments. This Leftist doctrine asserts that the 14th Amendment allows the federal government to enforce the first ten amendments (commonly but unadvisedly referred to as the Bill of Rights) against the states.

This counterfeit doctrine is a judicial misapplication of the 14th Amendment giving the feds sweeping powers not contemplated by the ratifiers of the amendment who intended the 14th Amendment to be a post-Civil War Reconstruction Amendment establishing ex-slaves as full citizens, nothing more.

The 14A was originally intended and limited to forbidding state laws segregating former slaves as confirmed in the 1872 Slaughter-House Cases. But in the 1900’s, slowly but surely, SCOTUS, ignoring original intent and precedent, has instead construed the 14A to allow the feds to enforce the first ten amendments and interfere with state laws leading to a parade of horribles like banning prayer and Bible study in state schools, overturning state abortion laws leading to 70+ million abortions, threatening gun rights, interference with state marriage laws, threatening free exercise of religion, etc.

The federal government including SCOTUS is the object, not enforcer, of the prohibitions of the first ten amendments. Constitutionally, the federal government may only act within the limited, enumerated powers delegated to it by the Constitution as confirmed by the first ten amendments.


26 posted on 06/19/2017 5:17:58 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MosesKnows

Reinstate, recover, reinforce - however you want to put it, the Right needs to get the Constitution front and center once again against the feds, who treat most of the Constitution as dead letter.

Electing federal representatives is only one way to do this and may not be the best away. Federal representatives have a bad habit of turning left inside the beltway.

The American People through their states need to become independent once again exercise their constitutional sovereignty and nullify and reject all unconstitutional federal acts.


27 posted on 06/19/2017 5:24:57 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216
And OBTW, the federal judiciary does NOT constitutionally make national law.

So you say. Ignore them at your peril regardless what you call them they can and do enforce them.

28 posted on 06/19/2017 7:22:49 PM PDT by itsahoot (As long as there is money to be divided, there will be division.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Sure there’s peril in resisting tyranny. But there’s greater peril in acquiescing to tyranny. Just ask the Founding Fathers.


29 posted on 06/20/2017 7:41:22 AM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: M Kehoe

Spot on.

FReegards


30 posted on 06/20/2017 9:11:08 AM PDT by MileHi (Liberalism is an ideology of parasites, hypocrites, grievance mongers, victims, and control freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson