Contact us for a Consultation

Unlimited Power

The federal government is only authorized to do things that are specifically listed in the Constitution.

Amendment X of the US Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

However, every politician lay out their respective agendas, from single-payer health care to a plan for a wall on our southern border.  But nearly all of these plans are unconstitutional twice over: not only are politicians not given the authority to do these things, but the federal government itself is also not empowered to do these things.

The Constitution creates a government of enumerated powers, which means the federal government is only authorized to do things that are specifically listed in the Constitution. And that list is relatively short.

The list appears in Article One, Section Eight and enumerates the proper objects of congressional legislation. Congress can:

  • borrow money, coin money, regulate its value, and punish counterfeiters
  • regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the states, and with Indian tribes
  • establish rules for naturalization and bankruptcy
  • establish Post Offices and Post Roads
  • issue patents and copyrights
  • establish courts inferior to the Supreme Court
  • punish pirates
  • suppress insurrections, repel invasions, declare war, raise an army, maintain a navy, and make rules for the army and navy
  • organize the Militia (leaving to the states the appointment of officers and the authority of training the Militias)

That’s it. This is all the Constitution permits the federal government to do.

But who ended up being tasked with deciding what Article One, Section Eight actually meant? Herein lies the wrinkle that enables all manner of constitutional mischief in the United States. The institution that ended up deciding what the federal government is empowered to do is itself a branch of the federal government. And it should come as no surprise that when push comes to shove, the Supreme Court routinely finds in favor of empowering the federal government.

Interstate Commerce

This sort of mischief flowered fully in the decade following ratification of the 21st Amendment. In 1942, the Supreme Court decided a case, Wickard v. Filburn, in which farmer Roscoe Filburn ran afoul of a federal law that limited how much wheat he was allowed to grow.

Where the federal government’s right to legislate the wheat market is to be found—because the word “wheat” is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. Be that as it may, the federal government’s aim was clear enough. It was to keep the price of wheat high enough for farmers to remain profitable. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 put an upper limit on how much wheat farmers were allowed to grow, which would serve to keep prices high by limiting supply.

Roscoe Filburn had grown 12 more acres of wheat than the law allowed. But not only did he not sell the excess wheat outside of his home state, but he also didn’t sell it at all. He used the wheat from those 12 acres to feed his cattle.

Filburn was very clearly not engaging in commerce, let alone interstate commerce, yet the Supreme Court found (unanimously) that because Congress had the authority to regulate interstate commerce, Congress also had the authority to prohibit Filburn from growing those 12 acres of wheat for his own use. The Supreme Court’s “reasoning”?

Had Filburn not fed his cattle that excess wheat, he would have been forced to purchase wheat on the open market. And even if he purchased wheat that was grown within his home state, doing so would have made less wheat available within his home state for other wheat buyers. Consequently, some wheat buyers within his home state would then have had to buy wheat from outside the state. Therefore, Filburn’s non-commercial activity was, according to the Supreme Court, interstate commerce.

Since Wickard, any time Congress has wanted to exercise power not authorized by the Constitution, lawmakers have simply had to make an argument that links whatever they want to accomplish to interstate commerce.

So today we have NASA, the FDA, the USDA, the EPA, federally subsidized student loans, Medicare, Medicaid, a federal minimum wage, and hundreds of other federal agencies, programs, and initiatives. Some of these do, indeed, involve interstate commerce. Many do not.

Today, we allow Congress to exercise almost any authority it likes. Further, we allow Congress to hand its authority over to unelected bureaucrats. So, whereas regulating alcohol required amending the Constitution, regulating marijuana requires only legislation. Regulating prescription medicines requires only bureaucratic action.

The sad result has been a government nearly limitless in its power. Sadder still is what this has done to our elections: Every four years, the American people ask candidates for more things neither the president nor Congress is constitutionally authorized to deliver. And this encourages a brand of candidate to run for office who is willing to ignore the Constitution in exchange for winning elections by making promises.

The first step in returning this Country to it’s foundation is in the process of reading, understanding, and applying the Constitution of the United States. This means, first and foremost, understanding the law and the concept of what this Country was designed to be.  When was the last time you read the Constitution and Declaration of Independence?  When was the last time our representatives read the documents of our foundation?  Do you even have a copy of those documents to understand the root of all law in this country we call home?

Goldfinch Winslow | © 2021 | 843 .357 .9301