Piss on the EPA, they own it.
They’ve earned it!
This is a subject that will divide this country like no other
(¶ 1.) The Congress shall have power …
(¶ 17.) To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession 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, dockyards, and other needful buildings;–And
(¶ 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.
The original constitution (the one said to be “for” the United States of America, (as opposed to the one adopted as bylaws for the municipal corporation now ruling the nation, which is only said to be “of” the United States of America, declares an actual boundary, on the (otherwise unlimited) power of the Congress to “exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever.” It might be difficult to determine an exact date when, or decision wherein, the Supreme Court first specifically and deliberately yielded the concept of such boundary to the desires of the federal government to legislate “exclusively” for State (non-federal) territory, but it is clear that the Congress, and multiple presidents, at least, have desired to at least ignore, if not obliterate, such limits.
And though they have never formally ruled to discard the boundary, nor to delete its constitutional verbiage, it is also clear that the Court has indeed, piece-at-a-time, ignored or yielded such bounds on federal power, many times over. Witness their decisions in Obamacare, “gay” marriage, and the steadfast refusal of the fedgov to yield to the (mostly western) States, lands that were originally intended by the founders to be turned over to the States, to name but three instances. This is the reason (to name one more instance), that it is commonly understood, by people on both sides of the issue, that shifting the balance of the Supreme Court leftward by one “Justice,” will effectively eliminate all legal protection for the right to keep and bear arms, and soon thereafter, for the rights of free speech, press, assembly, and religion, if not more.
Sadly, the majority of citizens since the founding, have either ignored their federal government’s desire for ever more power, or worse, have voted for candidates who sought it, to get a share of the promised freebies and advantages. I think it is now only a matter of time until de facto becomes de jure.
I hope I’m mistaken.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by L Tecolote.