Posted on 03/20/2015 10:00:10 AM PDT by IBD editorial writer
EPA=DOA
As mentioned in related threads, the major constitutional problems with the EPA are as follows.
First, consider that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate environmental issues.
In fact, regardless that federal Democrats, RINOs, activist judges and indoctrinated attorneys will argue that if the Constitution doesn’t say that the feds can’t do something then they can do it, the Supreme Court has addressed that foolish idea too. Politically correct interpretations of the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (5.2) aside, the Court has clarified in broad terms that powers not delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate environmental issues in this case, are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
So with all due respect to the family and friend of the late President Nixon, he was wrong to sign the bill that established the EPA imo.
Next, even if the states had delegated such power to the feds, note that the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Section 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide them from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative / regulatory powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected federal bureaucrats like those running the EPA and many other so-called “independent federal regulatory agencies.”
So Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not. And by delegating regulatory power to federal agencies like the EPA, especially powers that the feds don’t have in the first place, Congress is wrongly protecting the unpopular use of such powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of Sections 1-3 mentioned above.
The 17th Amendment has to go.
It’s to stop preppers.
If the EPA is so concerned about backyard barbeques, they should do something about the yearly forest fires.
They won’t be satisfied until we are all living like Ebenezer Scrooge, sitting in a cold,dark room, eating lukewarm gruel.
yet the Forest Service burns tens of thousands of acres of timber a year in “controlled burns” which choke everyone for a hundred miles in all directions!
*door burst open*
And how sir were you able to warm your gruel?
It should be cold as Dear Leader has decreed.
Off to Hillary’s Fun camp with you!
Good luck with that one. Summer is on the way. Can you say cookout? :-)
Trying to ban wood burning stoves in MN
True story from the 80’s. Driving up north a ways to stop at a place along the river where there are nice rapids. Was stuck behind an old blue panel van. I smelled a smell - thinking what is that then it hit me. I told hubby that smells like a charcoal grill. He said it couldn’t be. After a while we were convinced. The van was going the same place as we were. It parked, an old black guy got out and opened up the back doors. There was a lit kettle grill going in the back. He must have been hungry, did not want to wait to cook the fish he was going to catch.
They’ll also want to be certain that it was gluten-free.
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts
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.