Our Constitution is under attack again. Infrastructure laws are unconstitutional.
You have two choices: do nothing to stop the attack (submit, bow down and lick their boots — which will only encourage them), or do something. Now is the last chance to enforce the Constitution, or forever hold your peace.
“in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.”— Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, 17 November 1798
Infrastructure is not a federal government function. Infrastructure remains Unconstitutional. Always was. Always will be. No one who swears an oath to uphold the Constitution can use parliamentary procedure to commit mutiny.*
And, no, the Supreme Court’s McCulloch v. Maryland did not authorize infrastructure. More…
James Madison was called “The Father of the Constitution”. President James Madison vetoed the Bonus Bill of 1817, which would use federal funds to build roads, bridges, and canals throughout the country.
He would not participate in the unconstitutional act. The Constitution authorizes only specific enumerated powers, and there is NO expressed power for the federal government to do anything but maintain existing post roads. He wrote “The legislative powers vested in Congress are specified and enumerated in the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution,…and it does not appear that the power proposed to be exercised by the bill is among the enumerated powers.”
His veto stated that using the Commerce Clause, or the General Welfare Clause, or the Necessary and Proper Clause to justify a law “would be contrary to the established and consistent rules of interpretation, as rendering the special and careful enumeration of powers which follow the clause nugatory and improper,” adding that the bill “would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them.”
The infrastructure appropriation that the bill called for “can not be deduced from any part of it without an inadmissible latitude of construction and reliance on insufficient precedents,”
Here is his veto:
“To the House of Representatives of the United States:— President Madison veto of the Bonus Bill, March 3, 1817
Having considered the bill this day presented to me entitled “An act to set apart and pledge certain funds for internal improvements,” and which sets apart and pledges funds “for constructing roads and canals, and improving the navigation of water courses, in order to facilitate, promote, and give security to internal commerce among the several States, and to render more easy and less expensive the means and provisions for the common defense,” I am constrained by the insuperable difficulty I feel in reconciling the bill with the Constitution of the United States to return it with that objection to the House of Representatives, in which it originated. The legislative powers vested in Congress are specified and enumerated in the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, and it does not appear that the power proposed to be exercised by the bill is among the enumerated powers, or that it falls by any just interpretation with the power to make laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution those or other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States. “The power to regulate commerce among the several States” can not include a power to construct roads and canals, and to improve the navigation of water courses in order to facilitate, promote, and secure such commerce without a latitude of construction departing from the ordinary import of the terms strengthened by the known inconveniences which doubtless led to the grant of this remedial power to Congress. To refer the power in question to the clause “to provide for common defense and general welfare” would be contrary to the established and consistent rules of interpretation, as rendering the special and careful enumeration of powers which follow the clause nugatory and improper. Such a view of the Constitution would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them, the terms “common defense and general welfare” embracing every object and act within the purview of a legislative trust. It would have the effect of subjecting both the Constitution and laws of the several States in all cases not specifically exempted to be superseded by laws of Congress, it being expressly declared “that the Constitution of the United States and laws made in pursuance thereof shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges of every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” Such a view of the Constitution, finally, would have the effect of excluding the judicial authority of the United States from its participation in guarding the boundary between the legislative powers of the General and the State Governments, inasmuch as questions relating to the general welfare, being questions of policy and expediency, are unsusceptible of judicial cognizance and decision.”
Infrastructure laws are unconstitutional.
Hamilton on the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause:— (Alexander Hamilton, Elliot’s Debates, p. 4:187-88 and The Federalist Papers, #33)
“It will not, I presume, have escaped observation that it expressly confines the supremacy to laws made pursuant to the constitution” … If not, then states are constitutionally bound to nullify any law that is not pursuant to the Constitution.”
===== +++++ =====
Details are in my essay The Constitution Does Not Change
==== ::::: ====
You may also be interested in my articles:
- Bank Bail-in can now seize your accounts
- Bidens plan to monitor bank accounts
- The Beast’s Monetary System
- Biden’s Plan to tax the rich.
- Biden Lied about federal authority to deficit spend.
- The Coming Collapse
==== ::::: ====
If you want to challenge the loss of your rights, I recommend an online law course for those who will fight against the powers-that-be. It has save me and it might just be your get-out-of-jail card. HowToWinInCourt.com
If you want to join me in pondering how the deep state infiltrators got into power, read my 32 page report that questions lawyer’s integrity. https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/1068688
==== ::::: ====
Steven D. Miller is a freelance writer producing informative Articles, blog posts, ghost writing, newsletters, web pages, case studies, white papers, reports, eBooks and high-density documentaries. He is available to offer hope to any audience that yearns to breathe free.
Contact him at Steven.Miller@LibertyContentWriter.com