Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
spartan max2

Sen Rand Paul proposes new amendment

20 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

spartan max2

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1011

Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
CyberKen

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su

http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011

Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'

New Leadership in the U.S. Senate : Senator Rand Paul , Senator Ted Cruz , Senator Mike Lee :tu:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kowalski

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su

http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011

Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'

I like it. It's a good idea :tu:.....Although our Constitution already has provisions in it, that reign in the Federal government, but they just ignore it anyway....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su

http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011

Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'

Self understood in the existing constitution and therefore needs no special amendment. Now,if they ignore the existing ones,or don't know what the existing ones mean then this is just a piece of grandstanding.It will be ignored like so many other amendments.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CyberKen

I like it. It's a good idea :tu:.....Although our Constitution already has provisions in it, that reign in the Federal government, but they just ignore it anyway....

This will get everybodys attention.

Okay, why is this necessary? Oh , so THAT'S what they're doing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I like it. It's a good idea :tu:.....Although our Constitution already has provisions in it, that reign in the Federal government, but they just ignore it anyway....

"Congress shall make no law" is the clearest possible language though, it would have to add some difficulty to the processes of over-legislating/administrating and activist-judging.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StarMountainKid

Since I don't like Rand Paul's agenda, and this must be part of his agenda, I don't think it's a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2

Since I don't like Rand Paul's agenda, and this must be part of his agenda, I don't think it's a good idea.

I can understand that logic.

But I have to ask, what about his "agenda" do you not like?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PersonFromPorlock

I appreciate the idea, but it seems a little overwritten to me. Why not just "Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not applicable in the same way to any member of the civil government of the United States."

I say "applicable in the same way" because if we say "equally applicable" they'll be writing laws that exempt X and claiming they're "equally applicable" to anyone who qualifies as X. The carve-out for "civil government" reflects the fact that the military is a whole different place.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

In the interest against verbosity, even if we only got Section 1 passed, it would mean a great deal to our yet-to-be-written legal futures.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

i doubt it'll pass, even if it does, loopholes will be found.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pallidin

So Rand Paul is proposes a new Constitutional amendment. Thoughts? :su

http://www.paul.sena...release&id=1011

Below is from his site.

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to applying laws equally to the citizens of the United States and the Federal Government.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

'Article--

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'

Hahahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That has got to be one of the dumbest, immature and inane proposals I have ever heard.

The closest it will even get to "committee" is their garbage bin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
green_dude777

Since I don't like Rand Paul's agenda, and this must be part of his agenda, I don't think it's a good idea.

C'mon Star, I know you're smarter than that. Dumb people can have smart ideas. I mean, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

Hahahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That has got to be one of the dumbest, immature and inane proposals I have ever heard.

The closest it will even get to "committee" is their garbage bin.

I'm really confused by this response. How is the proposal dumb, immature, or insane? I think it's common sense, and kind of sad it isn't already assumed.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2

Hahahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That has got to be one of the dumbest, immature and inane proposals I have ever heard.

The closest it will even get to "committee" is their garbage bin.

I can understand not liking a politician. And I can understand people saying he is just grandstanding.

But Im confused how it is immature dumb or inane?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pallidin

I can understand not liking a politician. And I can understand people saying he is just grandstanding.

But Im confused how it is immature dumb or inane?

I just think the wording of the proposal sounds like it was drafted by a 12 year-old.

Edited by pallidin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spartan max2

I just think the wording of the proposal sounds like it was drafted by a 12 year-old.

But don't you see that is the whole point

The point is to make it so blatantly clear that the politicians cant twist the wording around like they do with the rest of the constitution.

Even thought the politicians would just ignore it if it got in the way,

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Varelse

be kind of cool to see both Paul's running rogue on their own 3rd party ticket in 16.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MiskatonicGrad

I just think the wording of the proposal sounds like it was drafted by a 12 year-old.

Yes and still we will have graduates of Harvard Law scratching there heads saying " wh-wh-what he mean?"

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StarMountainKid
But I have to ask, what about his "agenda" do you not like?

Well, I'll just say, although he can be independently minded, he is a member of the Tea Party movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CyberKen

Yes and still we will have graduates of Harvard Law scratching there heads saying " wh-wh-what he mean?"

I think Senator Ted Cruz is a Harvard Law Grad. :tu:

The Tea Party has real FirePower this year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.