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

Skip to comments.

U.S. Constitution & Congress: Where’s their power to get involved in Schiavo case?
U.S. Constitution via House of Representatives website ^ | 3/21/05

Posted on 03/21/2005 12:05:39 PM PST by Wolfstar

United States Constitution

Article I. Section. 8.

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Clause 5: To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

Clause 6: To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Clause 9: To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;

Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Clause 17: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, byCession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: constitution; delegated; houseof; power; representatives; schiavo; terri; terrischiavo; us
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 561-569 next last
To: El Gato

Clearly this isn't what was meant by privacy right. We know what the 4th amendment says. He's talking about the invention of a privacy right, but the Warren Court, to justify the Court's imposition of a radical cultural agenda, such as abortion on demand, etc.


381 posted on 03/21/2005 7:35:36 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
No. Instead, I consulted the United States Constitution. The relevant sections are posted above on this thread.

------------------------------------------------------------

Seems like you forgot a few "relevant" sections.

In fact one of the most important sections. having to deal with an individuals "rights"

382 posted on 03/21/2005 7:35:57 PM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar

And what does the 8th amendment mean, if not the preservation of innocent life, including the right not be killed by starvation by order of a court?


383 posted on 03/21/2005 7:37:06 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
It's at the beginning of the Constitution. It's called the "Bill of Rights".

This has nothing to do with deciding a marriage or devoted parents.

But you're stressing something about the Constitution that many intelligent and/or influential people don't want to talk about:

WHAT IS A HUMAN LIFE?!?!?!?!
384 posted on 03/21/2005 7:37:39 PM PST by SaltyJoe (Do you "life" enough to earn your inalienable rights? Does your judge think that you're alive?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blinachka
"The attorneys involved have been representing Terri's estranged husband."

As a result of her state, he is the legal guardian, and according to the law, he speaks for Terri.

According to Florida law, when representing Michael Schiavo, those attorneys are representing Terri.

It's the law that's bad here.

There should be limitations placed on legal guardians and oversight on their decisions when it comes to cases such as this.

In the absence of clearly detailed, legal documents, the Law should fault in favor of life for the subject, in this case, she should not be allowed to die from neglect...which is what this amounts to.

Unfortunately, laws are changed as a result of cases such as this.

That may be Terri's legacy.

385 posted on 03/21/2005 7:38:12 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar

Napolitano, unfortunately, is wrong again. Check out Bork, who actually knows what he's talking about (see above).


386 posted on 03/21/2005 7:38:24 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"At the very least, Terri Schiavo would have to be provided legal counsel to act on her behalf and look out for her interests aside from what her so-called "husband" would want for her."

The problem is that as her legal guardian, he does represent her.

Should my wife (God forbid) suffer serious injuries as a result of an accident, I am the individual legally entitled to make medical decisions for her.

387 posted on 03/21/2005 7:40:16 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: DMZFrank

Jeb Bush has no such power.


388 posted on 03/21/2005 7:43:03 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 370 | View Replies]

To: RepublicanCentury
"Terri's Law is, without question, constitutional."

If you adjudicate as such, why all the wasted motion going to the District Court?

389 posted on 03/21/2005 7:45:24 PM PST by verity (The Liberal Media and the ACLU are America's Enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
"Actually, inferior courts do not have to exist. They exist because Congress has established an inferior court system."

They are called "inferior" because one is called Supreme...everything else then must be inferior to something that is described as being "Supreme".

Get it now?

It does not mean that they are either subject to, or controlled by Congress.

390 posted on 03/21/2005 7:45:40 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar

Why is it that people who disagree with you are said to be using emotions (which the need to set aside) and consider the larger constitutional issue? A little arrogant, don't you think? What do you think we're arguing?


391 posted on 03/21/2005 7:46:56 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

Can you post it?


392 posted on 03/21/2005 7:47:26 PM PST by MarMema ("America may have won the battles, but the Nazis won the war." Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio
The bill before Congress essentially treats the Florida judgment as a death sentence, warranting federal habeas review. Mrs. Schiavo is NOT on life support. The court order to remove the feeding tube is in essence an order to starve her to death.

I believe starving and dehydrating an individual to death would be considered "cruel and unusual" and torturous punishment.

Of course torture is forbidden under our constitution.

393 posted on 03/21/2005 7:49:43 PM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Demloser is right, and you are wrong. The Constitution does not set up inferior courts. It explicitly leaves it to Congress to do so. And Congress regulates those courts as well, AND the Supreme Court, apart from certain specific powers involving ambassadors, etc., which aren't relevant here. Congress can and has abolished courts, limited judicial review, etc.


394 posted on 03/21/2005 7:49:45 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
That may be Terri's legacy.

Unfortunately for Terri and her family (BLOOD relations) that may very well be the case but I will not give up hope for these people and fellow citizens. I will continue to pray and hope that she is given another chance and HER day in court. There are too many questions and too many strange and ugly issues in this case. I simply cannot get past Michael Schiavo claiming to "love" Terri yet having another woman in his life (whom would be considered a common law wife in places that recognize common law) and having TWO children with this woman. THAT is NOT "love" for Terri. It is a betrayal of her and the wedding vows he took.

Also, I cannot get past statements that he has made such as "She died 15 years ago" yet he waited seven or eight years to mention that she wished to die if she were ever in an incapacitated state and this conveniently happened after the malpractice award was recieved.

I also cannot imagine that her family (parents, sister and brother) have anything to gain from this other than keeping their beloved family member alive. In all interviews I have seen, thay are the ones who come across as believable. They have remained faithful to Terri.

395 posted on 03/21/2005 7:51:50 PM PST by blinachka (Vechnaya Pamyat Daddy... xoxo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 385 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Wish I could hang around for more, but need my beauty rest. Night.


396 posted on 03/21/2005 7:52:07 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Exactly. Judge Andrew Napolitano of FOX News said that although members of Congress do get what's known as "private" legislation inserted into bills from time to time to address a particular constituent need, what Congress did on the Schiavo case has never been done before in American history.

Napolitano is full of crap.

397 posted on 03/21/2005 7:52:57 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: holdonnow
"Demloser is right, and you are wrong. The Constitution does not set up inferior courts. It explicitly leaves it to Congress to do so."

I never argued that, so perhaps you should read the full set of posts before jumping into the middle of a discussion, and assuming that you know what's being discussed.

The term "inferior" and what it means is the point being discussed.

398 posted on 03/21/2005 7:54:02 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: holdonnow
Here's the original point being debated:

"'Subordinate' may not have been the correct word, but the federal court system is "inferior" to Congress."

Are you siding with demloser in saying that inferior Federal Courts are subordinate to Congress?

Are you saying that the inferior Federal Courts exist to adjudicate according to the wishes of the Legislative branch?

399 posted on 03/21/2005 7:57:42 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: blinachka

Terri's best weapon, and her brightest hope are our prayers.


400 posted on 03/21/2005 7:58:50 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380381-400401-420 ... 561-569 next 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