User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 26 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 259

Thread: Do Americans have a Responsibility to obey Laws they had no hand in making?

  1. #1
    Points: 264,399, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 82.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307877
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,547
    Points
    264,399
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,662
    Thanked 39,251x in 27,872 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Do Americans have a Responsibility to obey Laws they had no hand in making?

    From time to time I read a new book on an old subject. Today's book is a short history of the US beginning prior to the Revolution. This morning I read about James Otis. While his arguments covered British "Writs of Assistance" used to grant royal authority to search any house or any person, the broader question was a citizen's responsibility to obey laws they have no hand in making.

    That was in 1761. Today, in 2018 the majority of the Federal Laws are crafted, not by the Legislative Branch, limited by the Constitution, but by Executive Branch Independent Agencies, in an unconstitutional fashion. These Independent agencies embody tyranny. The United States is flooded with Executive Branch Independent Agencies. The last time I searched for them I came up with more than 400 agencies.

    Given their lack of Constitutional authority, given their anti-republican nature, should we stop obeying the laws they impose on us?

    We are guaranteed a republican form of government under our Constitution. Isn't it time to rebel against the unconstitutional actions of the Legislative and the Executive Branches and take back our right of self-governance?
    Last edited by MisterVeritis; 06-02-2018 at 10:03 AM.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MisterVeritis For This Useful Post:

    Lummy (06-02-2018),Mechanic (06-02-2018),ODB (06-07-2018),stjames1_53 (06-02-2018)

  3. #2

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 473,531, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 65.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassYour first GroupVeteranRecommendation First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    DGUtley's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    200779
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    52,945
    Points
    473,531
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    17,068
    Thanked 46,049x in 24,879 Posts
    Mentioned
    887 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    Given their lack of Constitutional authority, given their anti-republican nature, should we stop obeying the laws they impose on us?
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    We are guaranteed a republican form of government under our Constitution. Isn't it time to rebel against the Unconstitutional actions of the Legislative and the Executive Branches and take back our right of self governance?
    These are very interesting questions. I will have to think about it. The problem with your premise is that the courts have held that the regulations established by the executive branch are valid constitutionally for a variety of reasons. The fact that you disagree with them is of no consequence to the Court. So..., is it time to say 'regardless of what the Court says, my interpretation of the Constitution is correct and it is war if they don't bend to my interpretation'
    Last edited by DGUtley; 06-02-2018 at 10:03 AM.
    Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes​

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DGUtley For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (06-02-2018),nathanbforrest45 (06-02-2018)

  5. #3
    Points: 138,416, Level: 89
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 1,034
    Overall activity: 35.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    stjames1_53's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    58248
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    50,629
    Points
    138,416
    Level
    89
    Thanks Given
    104,296
    Thanked 29,269x in 20,298 Posts
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Current history: Those damned meany ol' ranchers gave the BLM a black eye over the Bundy issue. BLM is another one of those agencies that has established it tyrannical rule over personal property along with the EPA.......showing us that they are only in it for the power and money. Yep, these two we can do without.
    It is easier to deal with those types of agencies when they are located ONLY in those states where such designed agencies resides.
    It's a long way to DC.
    For waltky: http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/
    "The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools."
    - Thucydides

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" B. Franklin
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

  6. #4
    Points: 264,399, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 82.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307877
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,547
    Points
    264,399
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,662
    Thanked 39,251x in 27,872 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DGUtley View Post
    These are very interesting questions. I will have to think about it. The problem with your premise is that the courts have held that the regulations established by the executive branch are valid constitutionally for a variety of reasons. The fact that you disagree with them is of no consequence to the Court. So..., is it time to say 'regardless of what the Court says, my interpretation of the Constitution is correct and it is war if they don't bend to my interpretation'
    The Constitution is clear. The Courts are in error.

    Can you show me the Article in the Constitution that grants the Executive Branch lawmaking powers?

    Slavery was once upheld by the courts. The Courts took powers they were not granted. That question is for another day.

    If the courts persist in making unconstitutional rulings should we obey the courts?
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  7. #5
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496582
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,592x in 94,421 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The executive branch agencies don't create laws, they create regulations. The difference really isn't significant for most people.

    We do have a problem with the legislature ceding much of its power to the Executive branch.
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    From time to time I read a new book on an old subject. Today's book is a short history of the US beginning prior to the Revolution. This morning I read about James Otis. While his arguments covered British "Writs of Assistance" used to grant royal authority to search any house or any person, the broader question was a citizen's responsibility to obey laws they have no hand in making.

    That was in 1761. Today, in 2018 the majority of the Federal Laws are crafted, not by the Legislative Branch, limited by the Constitution, but by Executive Branch Independent Agencies, in an unconstitutional fashion. These Independent agencies embody tyranny. The United States is flooded with Executive Branch Independent Agencies. The last time I searched for them I came up with more than 400 agencies.

    Given their lack of Constitutional authority, given their anti-republican nature, should we stop obeying the laws they impose on us?

    We are guaranteed a republican form of government under our Constitution. Isn't it time to rebel against the unconstitutional actions of the Legislative and the Executive Branches and take back our right of self-governance?
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (06-02-2018)

  9. #6
    Points: 264,399, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 82.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307877
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,547
    Points
    264,399
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,662
    Thanked 39,251x in 27,872 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    The executive branch agencies don't create laws, they create regulations. The difference really isn't significant for most people.

    We do have a problem with the legislature ceding much of its power to the Executive branch.
    A rose by any other name...

    A regulation is a law. The Constitution makes no provision for one branch giving away its Constitutional responsibilities.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  10. #7
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496582
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,592x in 94,421 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    The Constitution is clear. The Courts are in error.

    Can you show me the Article in the Constitution that grants the Executive Branch lawmaking powers?

    Slavery was once upheld by the courts. The Courts took powers they were not granted. That question is for another day.

    If the courts persist in making unconstitutional rulings should we obey the courts?
    It isn't in the constitution. It is in the laws written by the legislature. In many if not most laws passed by Congress, they have language along these lines: relevant agency(ies) will promulgate regulations to enact this law. When the law would create significant burdens on citizens or companies, the agency has to use the rule-making process- which can take a year or longer. I have posted a link to the government website that manages of these regulations going through the process. I encourage everyone to create accounts (it is free) and comment on any proposed regulation that you are interested in. Don't go nuts on them- your comment may be published in the Federal Register.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  11. #8
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,122, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496582
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,700
    Points
    859,122
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,223
    Thanked 147,592x in 94,421 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    A rose by any other name...

    A regulation is a law. The Constitution makes no provision for one branch giving away its Constitutional responsibilities.
    The legislature does that a lot. The war powers act is an example.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  12. #9
    Points: 79,997, Level: 68
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 53
    Overall activity: 0.3%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    nathanbforrest45's Avatar Banned
    Karma
    77960
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    In a house on a hill
    Posts
    28,260
    Points
    79,997
    Level
    68
    Thanks Given
    7,102
    Thanked 16,261x in 10,568 Posts
    Mentioned
    129 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Does this mean that any law someone may disagree with can be ignored? So, any law would only applied to someone who agreed with it? If I disagreed that robbing Federal banks was criminal it would ok to rob Federal banks?

    As someone pointed out its not really laws that are the issue but the regulations that stem from those laws. I still would err on the side of obeying the regulation and working to get it changed. Anything else is pure anarchy.
    Last edited by nathanbforrest45; 06-02-2018 at 11:26 AM.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to nathanbforrest45 For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (06-02-2018)

  14. #10

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 473,531, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 65.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassYour first GroupVeteranRecommendation First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    DGUtley's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    200779
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    52,945
    Points
    473,531
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    17,068
    Thanked 46,049x in 24,879 Posts
    Mentioned
    887 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Congress, vested with enumerated “legislative Powers,” Art. I, § 1, cannot delegate its “exclusively legislative” authority at all. Wayman v. Southard, 10 Wheat. 1, 42–43, 6 L.Ed. 253 (1825) (Marshall, C.J.). The Court has invalidated statutes for that very reason. See A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495, 55 S.Ct. 837, 79 L.Ed. 1570 (1935); Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388, 55 S.Ct. 241, 79 L.Ed. 446 (1935); see also Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361, 373, n. 7, 109 S.Ct. 647, 102 L.Ed.2d 714 (1989) (citing, inter alia, Industrial Union Dept., AFL–CIO v. American Petroleum Institute, 448 U.S. 607, 646, 100 S.Ct. 2844, 65 L.Ed.2d 1010 (1980)).

    The principle that Congress cannot delegate away its vested powers exists to protect liberty. Our Constitution, by careful design, prescribes a process for making law, and within that process there are many accountability checkpoints. See INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 959, 103 S.Ct. 2764, 77 L.Ed.2d 317 (1983). It would dash the whole scheme if Congress could give its power away to an entity that is not constrained by those checkpoints. The Constitution's deliberative process was viewed by the Framers as a valuable feature, see, e.g., Manning, Lawmaking Made Easy, 10 Green Bag 2d 202 (2007) ( “[B]icameralism and presentment make lawmaking difficult by design ” (citing, inter alia, The Federalist No. 62, p. 378 (J. Madison), and No. 63, at 443–444 (A. Hamilton))), not something to be lamented and evaded.


    The nondelegation doctrine is rooted in the principle of separation of powers that underlies our tripartite system of Government. The Constitution provides that “[a]ll legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States,” U.S. Const., Art. I, § 1, and we long have insisted that “the integrity and maintenance of *372 the system of government ordained by the Constitution” mandate that Congress generally cannot delegate its legislative power to another Branch. Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649, 692, 12 S.Ct. 495, 504, 36 L.Ed. 294 (1892). We also have recognized, however, that the separation-of-powers principle, and the nondelegation doctrine in particular, do not prevent Congress from obtaining the assistance of its coordinate Branches. In a passage now enshrined in our jurisprudence, Chief Justice Taft, writing for the Court, explained our approach to such cooperative ventures: “In determining what [Congress] may do in seeking assistance from another branch, the extent and character **655 of that assistance must be fixed according to common sense and the inherent necessities of the government co-ordination.” J.W. Hampton, Jr., & Co. v. United States, 276 U.S. 394, 406, 48 S.Ct. 348, 351, 72 L.Ed. 624 (1928). So long as Congress “shall lay down by legislative act an intelligible principle to which the person or body authorized to [exercise the delegated authority] is directed to conform, such legislative action is not a forbidden delegation of legislative power.” Id., at 409, 48 S.Ct., at 352.
    Last edited by DGUtley; 06-02-2018 at 11:58 AM.
    Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes​

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DGUtley For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (06-02-2018),Peter1469 (06-02-2018)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts