NATION: IS THE CONSTITUTION SUSPENDED?

THE NEW AMERICAN ^ | February 5, 1996 | Thomas A. Burzynski

[dixie sass]

In recent years, an ever-increasing number of alarming rumors have been paraded before Americans concerning their nation's future. Fears of United Nations forces in Montana, a concentration camp in downtown Indianapolis, and black helicopters everywhere are but a few of the sensational stories that have been spread through talk radio, the Internet, and tabloid newspapers.

The most recent addition to this maelstrom of false alarms offers the theory that the U.S. Constitution has been suspended since 1933 through a declaration of national emergency by President Franklin Roosevelt. This alarming assertion is being promoted chiefly by Dr. Eugene Schroder, a Colorado veterinarian, through his book Constitution: Fact or Fiction. According to a biography provided by his publisher, Dr. Schroder "uncovered the use of emergency powers to set aside the Constitution" several years ago and has been investigating the situation ever since. Dr. Schroder's efforts to publicize the issue have been boosted by interviews in the Spotlight and Anti-Shyster publications as well as through appearances on talk-radio programs.

Dr. Schroder has apparently influenced others. Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America (GOA), endorsed and recommended Dr. Schroder's work, declaring that "America needs to read this book!" GOA has released a video, Enemy Public Number One, which mirrors the arguments of Dr. Schroder. Likewise, the Republican Party of Texas, the nation's largest state Republican party, issued a resolution claiming that the Constitution has been suspended and calling for its restoration. John Tello, a member of the executive committee of the Texas Republican Party and the primary backer of the resolution, told The New American, "Dr. Eugene Schroder worked with us." Seemingly, these groups have taken Dr. Schroder's theory as fact without checking the accuracy of the information on which it is based.

The Schroder Theory

According to Schroder, the foundation for the current crisis was laid on October 6, 1917 with the passage of the Trading With the Enemy Act. This act gave the President the power to regulate, during time of war, all financial transactions involving any "individual, partnership, or body of individuals residing within any nation with which the U.S. is at war." On March 9, 1933, five days after Roosevelt's inauguration and four days after he had declared a national emergency, Congress passed the Emergency Banking Act, which amended the Trading With the Enemy Act to include regulation of transactions not only with the enemy but also between Americans during time of war or national emergency.

Since FDR had already declared a national emergency to deal with the bank "crisis," this unconstitutional legislation immediately gave the President much of the confidence he needed to launch the economic segment of his "New Deal" agenda. The result, of course, was an assault on the traditional form of American government and the free enterprise system under which America had flourished. FDR's declaration of a national emergency has never been terminated and has been joined by numerous other declarations of national emergency by subsequent presidents. Dr. Schroder cites this, as well as various government reports and laws, as "proof" that our nation has slipped into an "unconstitutional dictatorship." But as we shall see, he overlooks the fact that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and cannot be suspended or superseded via a law or presidential decree. In effect, he confuses violations of the Constitution with a suspension of the Constitution.

Fact and Fiction

One piece of Schroder's documentation comes from a 1973 Senate report which ominously stated:

"Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.... Under powers delegated ... [during a national emergency] the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens."

Aside from being unconstitutional, the level of tyranny described by this 22-year-old Senate report has never been reached. Harold Relyea, a specialist in American national government with the Congressional Research Service, explained to The New American: "The emergency declared in 1933 still exists as a matter of law but not as a matter of policy. It has never been terminated but all authority conferred by the declaration has gone into dormancy."

In his book Constitution: Fact or Fiction, Dr. Schroder contends: "The [U.S.] Constitution can be suspended by any president of the US who ascertains and proclaims a widespread territorial revolt." This claim, however, is not sustained by the Constitution itself, which is the sole legitimate source of federal power. The writ of habeas corpus, as specified in Article I, section 9, is the lone provision of the Constitution which may be suspended -- and even then, only in "cases of rebellion or invasion." Under the Constitution the writ could be suspended during a period of national emergency only if the national emergency in question were a "rebellion or invasion." As Relyea emphasized to The New American, "The Constitution has never been suspended."

So how does Schroder reach his conclusion in light of the Constitution? Largely by way of faulty research. For instance, one of the primary pieces of evidence he cites involves Title 12, Section 95(b) of the United States Code. Writes Schroder:

"[I]f we went to the library today and picked up a copy of 12 USC and went to section 95(b) ... we will find a law which states: 'The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by subsection (b) of section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917 [Trading With the Enemy Act], as amended, are hereby approved and confirmed.' "

Schroder claims that this section of the U.S. Code means that everything the President or the Secretary of the Treasury has done since March 4, 1933 and anything that the President or the Secretary of the Treasury is hereafter going to do is automatically "approved and confirmed."

However, research reveals that Dr. Schroder is wrong. Doing as he suggests, this author went to the library, picked up a copy of Title 12 USC, and went to section 95(b), where he found the following:

"The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by section 95a of this title, are approved and confirmed."

Looking in section 95(b) of USC Title 12, this writer found, in place of Dr. Schroder's reference to the 1917 Trading With the Enemy Act, a reference to "section 95(a) of this title." Section 95(a) refers only to a time of war, not to a period of national emergency. Dr. Schroder quoted from an outdated version of the U.S. Code.

In addition, the 1995 resolution passed by the Texas Republicans contains the very same error. John Tello told The New American that Schroder "became aware of the change in 1987." But Tello added that the change in this law is reflected neither in his resolution nor in Schroder's book because they both believe the government is still operating under the older phraseology.

Ignoring the Constitution

The current emergency power supplied to the President and the Secretary of the Treasury by section 95(a) authorizes them to regulate America's banking system, even to order the closing of banks. But such powers are clearly unconstitutional on two counts: The Constitution contains no authorization for any federal authority to declare a national emergency, and it likewise contains no authorization for regulating or closing banks. The absence of such grants of power in the body of the Constitution are, of course, reinforced by the Tenth Amendment. Therefore, the Constitution cannot be suspended as Dr. Schroder believes. Instead, its fundamental limitations are being ignored and the power of the executive branch of government is being permitted to grow to ominous proportions.

Dr. Schroder makes another misstep when he cites the Trading With the Enemy Act. To buttress his claim that we live in a dictatorship brought on via the use of emergency powers, he cites the following portion of the act: "During time of war or during any other period of national emergency declared by the President, the President may ..." regulate to the point of prohibiting any transaction involving Americans. But even this portion of the act, though always unconstitutional, was amended in 1977 to read: "During time of war, the President may...." What was deleted from the original by the 1977 amendment, of course, is the reference to a "national emergency declared by the President."

In 1976 Congress passed the National Emergencies Termination Act, which specified that any national emergency not extended by the President on an annual basis will be automatically terminated. Also, the act recognized the power of Congress to terminate a national emergency. Schroder claims that the national emergency declared by FDR in 1933 was expressly exempted from this act. But he fails to note that this exemption was done away with one year later in a measure amending the Trading With the Enemy Act.

Danger of Rumors

The rumor of a suspended Constitution represents only the latest in what has become a labyrinth of false trails and dead-ends, all with the potential to confuse and neutralize well-meaning conservatives. Mysterious executive orders prohibiting food hoarding, undue concern about yellow fringes around the American flag, and tales of Russian weather modification all damage the credibility of otherwise effective conservative activists. But the rumor that the Constitution has already been suspended delivers a double blow to the conservative movement since it is not only patently false, but is infecting good Americans with a sense of hopelessness. If the Constitution has been suspended, then constituent pressure on congressmen is useless, all checks and balances designed into our system of government no longer apply, and the government is incapable of safeguarding our God-given rights.

Fortunately, as long as the Constitution still stands, any government action that is based on extra-constitutional powers is ipso facto unconstitutional. What America needs are congressional declarations that expose as nullities all illegally usurped powers. In addition, the people must learn to resist the distractions of the rumor mill and, instead, generate constant and informed vigilance lest their freedoms disappear at the hands of those who always claim that they mean to rule well, but who most of all mean always to rule.

[Mudboy Slim]

"If our voices and actions aren't being heard, what do we do..."

In October 2002, a Million Patriot March fer Liberty & Justice at the steps of the U.S. Capitol would seem like a reasonable suggestion, IMHO...MUD

[dixie sass]

We ARE the problem. So many of the populus are lazy and the only thing that they want to do is sit on their arse's with their fingers in the classic position. How do we reach them, how do we get them out? Education is the only answer, but I am of the conclusion (today, at this moment) that most don't want to be a part of things, that someone else is better qualified to make decisions for them.

We can and are trying to educate them, but how do we make them CARE about what is happening? Even with the events of the past 18 months, they still don't or won't give a rat's @ss about their future or their children's future.

We are the inheritors of a great legacy, what are we doing to keep it? To preserve it?

[dixie sass]

I could be snide and say "What if you gave a March and no-one came?" But I won't be because there are a few of us who do care and would come for no other reason than love of country. Can you get a Million to converge on Washington?

[dixie sass]

I would have thought that was a given.

[A Navy Vet]

Why suspend it when you can distort, misinterpret, abuse, and just ignore it?

[Mudboy Slim]

"Can you get a Million to converge on Washington?"

I can't...and JimRob can't, but a month before a very important election wherein the DemonRAT-controlled Senate is obstructing the Agenda of a Popular WarTime President and a GOP-controlled House, yeah, I think the Right can get enough folks to converge on DeeCee for it to leave an impression on the Sheeple!!

FReegards...MUD

[CholeraJoe]

United Nations forces in Montana,

The only UN forces in Montana that wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb would be Canadians. You don't see many non-whites here and a furrin accent is rare.

OTOH, most Canadians you see here are pensioners driving motor homes or drug-crazed 18-wheeler truckers.

[sultan88]

Can you get a Million to converge on Washington?

Well, a lot of us are looking for an election year project. Especially if we do not have a contested election in our own state to work on. This sounds like it has great potential.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

The good news is that the Constitution is supreme.

The bad news is that unless you can buy a judge you are not afforded the protections of that document.

[nanny]

Now you lost me. If I were to march, it would be against the agenda of this popular wartime President. I see his actions as some of the most frightening in my lifetime. If the Democrats are obstructing his agenda, I certainly don't see it as his agenda seems to be theirs, or actually more than they could have imagined in their wildest dreams.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Woodstock II"
(To be sung to Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young's "Woodstock")

Well, I came upon a dude named Rush...
He was talkin' about Left's 'Ho-oh-oh...
And I asked him, "Tell me where we are goin'?!"
Limbaugh told me...

Said, "We're goin' to the DeeCee Mall...
Gonna join in The Patriots' Stand...
Rebuild Reagan's Shinin' City on the Hill...yeah!!"

We are starvin'...fer some Boldness...
RE-IMPEACH...Senate shall CONVICT!!
Folks, we must now DETHRONE Slick the Evil Tyrant!!!

Folks, show the Left what Right is...
Lib'rals shall recoil in FRight!!
Yes, they'll cower from Lord's Justice...
Waco's burnin'...
DemocRATS're the Party of Fear...
FReepers, ain't it time we make Our Stand?!
Just IGNORE the Media Spin...
Them Leftist Whores ain't winnin'!!!

We're God's Warriors...Right's emboldened!!
RE-IMPEACH...Senate Shall CONVICT!!
Patriots shall now DETHRONE Left's Chi-Com Whore...yeah!!!

(Guitar Jammin')

We're the Right-Wing...we're emboldened...
We'll git Slick...you know it, too, Rush!!
We shall then INDICT Clinton...CONVICT! IMPRISON!!
By the time we got to Congress...
We were o'er One Million Strong...
Poker Face cranked righteous songs...Whatta Celebration!!!
Yes, we FReep because we love this Great Land...
Takin' MY guns?! That won't fly...
Demand Justice fer Slick's lies...
Lord, Save Our Nation!!

Git Out, Lib'rals!! Yer time's OVER!!
Yer payin' up fer yer Devil's Bargain!!
'Cuz we got to get ourselves back to the Gah-ah-ah-arden!!

Mudboy Slim
20 September 2000

FReepers, we've got one great chance to rile up the Sheeple before Election Day 2002...please join us in DeeCee on the ??th of October at the Steps of the Capitol Building for a wonderful day of patriotic speeches and music!!

RE-IMPEACH. CONVICT. DETHRONE.
DISBAR. DE-PENSION. DE-LEGITIMIZE.
INDICT. CONVICT. IMPRISON. DISCARD KEY.

FReegards...MUD 1 Posted on 09/20/2000 06:54:03 PDT by Mudboy Slim (Justice Shall Be Ours!!!)

Heh heh heh...dust this ol' badboy off!!

LOL...MUD

[Poohbah]

I could be snide and say "What if you gave a March and no-one came?" But I won't be because there are a few of us who do care and would come for no other reason than love of country. Can you get a Million to converge on Washington?

Do you know why one conservative GOP activist does the work of ten?

Because the other nine conservatives are perpetual no-shows.

Trust me, you do NOT want to try organizing a "Million Patriot March," because that will be the ONE time the press notices the real turnout at these sorts of events--and the number of people who actually bother to show will be FAR less than the numbers who will TALK about showing.

[Mudboy Slim]

"...the DemonRAT-controlled Senate is obstructing the Agenda of a Popular WarTime President and a GOP-controlled House..."

"Now you lost me. If I were to march, it would be against the agenda of this popular wartime President."

So, you'd prefer a DemonRAT-controlled House and two more years of D'asshole obstructing conservative judicial appointments and deeper tax cuts and School Vouchers and Social Security Personalization? If we can build the momentum behind a unified majority in both houses towards limiting the Power and Cost of the Federal Leviathan, I say we give Dubyuh the opportunity to sign some Conservative legislation!!

FReegards...MUD

[sultan88]

Yes! One of yer Golden Oldies, Mud! It still moves me.

Maybe Poohbah is right. Calling it a MILLION Patriot March will be counter productive. How about "The THOUSAND FReedom Lovers Shindig"?

[Mudboy Slim]

"Maybe Poohbah is right."

Maybe Poohbah needn't show...MUD

[Mudboy Slim]

"...the number of people who actually bother to show will be FAR less than the numbers who will TALK about showing."

If only 100,000 show up, we could adjust...MUD

[Poohbah]

Maybe Poohbah needn't show...MUD

Son, I'd probably be one of the few to actually bother showing up. That remark about the no-shows is based on my experience working for the GOP after the 1994 election. Most conservatives just could not be bothered with the messy details of actually moving the agenda forward or earning sweat equity--but they sure as hell wanted to set the agenda in 1996.

Conservatism has far too many summer soldiers and sunshine patriots.

[Centurion2000]

The Constitution is Dead ... but it's funeral has not been made public.

[dixie sass]

Why do you say that? Perhaps you should be more specific. The Constitution is simply a blue print of the three branches of government - legislative, judicial and executive. The basic structure is still there. We just need to do some shoring up or restoration of the structure. No, I don't believe that it is dead. I refuse to accept that premise because the Constitution is not a living, breathing entity.

[dixie sass]

I agree with you. To much talking and not enough doing. We need to become more co-hesive as a group. We let our idealism get in the way of the things we need to be doing. We are just as guilty as the person who sits at home and does nothing - we are all "sound and fury" with little substance. We are the reason the liberals win out everytime.