A Victory for the Tenth Amendment in the Supreme Court

Mr. Natelson, I've read your book " The Original Constitution" and a number of your articles at your site, and have found your writings to be informative and helpful..that being said, there are some problems with your position of the US constitution being an act of the people granting the federal government power. I am only going to address one problem though:

Yes, no legitimate government at any level exists without the people granting that government power, but what you are essentially claiming is that all the people in the states acted in accord, rather than in their separate polities to ratify the US constitution. You, yourself should know that even the preamble was originally meant to be stated "We the people of the State of Georgia, Maryland, etc., but even further the US constitution itself says in Article 7 that it is between the states, so what the people ratified was an arrangement that kept the states separate and acting as the agents for the people, this makes it a compact.

There are some American Politicians who are accusing others of being isolationist or that it will lower the confidence of NATO to stop an Illegal War that is Undeclared, Unconstitutional, and Unnecessary, rather than promoting a cease fire, followed by negotiations. It is wise and proper to isolate yourself from things that are not legal, or if they are counterproductive, or even if they are bad. If NATO exhausts itself on an Unnecessary War, then they will not be prepared for the future. It will not matter how much Confidence a Person has, if he does not have the Resources, then he cannot achieve his objective. It would be better to have no confidence and to have the Resources, because there are more chances of success under that scenario. The American Military is coming Home to a Bankrupt America, and the concerns of those People; whether they are in the Military, or just Civilians who sell their Goods and Services to the American Military, will be with keeping their jobs in a depressed Jobs Market. They will Only keep their jobs, by Totally Following the Decrees of the Emperor of America, and that means that America will become a Military Dictatorship. I know that People will say that past American Presidents have not followed the Law, and there were no problems for the American People. That was because the Military was Overseas, and the American People were Armed, and America was Prosperous and had Full Employment. I am taking about the future where the American Military is all at Home, and if they will follow the orders of one Emperor, or the Congress, because we know that Abraham Lincoln wanted to wage a Civil war in America. It is up to the American People to petition Congress to recognize no claimed power of any present and future President to wage war other than by the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. If America did not spend all that Money Overseas on Overseas Military Bases, because the Military is back Home, then that money would be a good Stimulus Package year after year for the American Economy. That money could be spent on Alternative Energy, and on recycling Resources, and these will create much Employment. To many People, it seems like the American Establishment is deliberately creating Unemployment and Dictatorship, even by having genetically modified crops, where small farmers are prevented from working and lowering to the price of food. The American Citizens as a 100% might want to consider voting for Candidates who want 100% Public Funding for Elections, in order to Discourage Corruption of Public Officials. We, the people of Democracyland, whose national borders are defined by the United Nations Charter and International Law, are committed to the Highest Level of Democracy known to Mankind. Democracyland, will be a True Democracy; it will have 100% Public Funding for Elections and Referendums; it will have no military alliances; it will be 100% against racism; it will have no genetically modified crops; it will plant many trees; and it will have 100% recycling.

The tenth amendment pretty much does everything that every other amendment is suppose to protect such as the things in the first amendment. There is no power to eliminate speech, press, religion, petition, and so forth. That means that that power is reserved to the states or to the people unless prohbitied by the constitution itself. That sets the constitution as the supreme law of the land--not federal law itself.

Andrew Nappi just recently alerted me to Bond. I read it as well. It was not a particularly remarkable ruling. Individuals have been allowed to challenge federal excesses since the beginning. Violations of First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments have always been grounds, as have so many others, such as the Fourteenth, and so on.

There is nothing unique about being consistent and holding that a violation of the Constitution remains a violation, even if it is found by looking at Article 1, Section 8 with aid by the Tenth. That's why the Court was unanimous. It had no choice. It boggles me that the 9th Circuit held otherwise, so clearly there are some out there who get it completely wrong.

As to the "necessary and proper" analysis under the treaty clause, the standard to be applied, with which you agree, is unfortunately an amorphous one. Some people assert that a power cannot be necessary and proper if it seems to gobble up another provision. This is very tenuous. May a treaty be entered where the feds assent to ratchet up the war on drugs? How about banning abortion on a global scale?

These are troubling questions since the purpose of treaties has expanded to include implementing domestic policies in an effort to globalize them - much like the interstate commerce clause has been used on a national level.