In the face of the sheer stupidity of the elected government of the United States, I would like to propose a few concise amendments to the United States Constitution to keep our native criminal class on the job.
- The United States shall have no authority over matters of morality or private conscience over anyone who is not currently employed by an agency of or military branch of the United States.
- The United States shall have no authority to levy direct taxation on or regulate private property except where enumerated in another section of this constitution.
- Any law which is deemed grossly unconstitutional by the judiciary shall become a civil liability to any elected official who drafted it, voted for it or who signed it into law.
- Any law that undermines the United States' sovereignty or acknowledges a civil government superior in standing to the United States shall constitute treason.
- National security shall not be a valid excuse for excusing a law, policy or action from judicial review except where it may be proven that the United States or an ally shall be gravely or mortally injured by the judicial review.
- All laws established pursuant to Article I, Section 8 shall be deemed inferior in legal standing to all protections afforded by this Constitution, the constitutions of the several states and the legal protections of private property of the several states.
- The United States shall not subsidize or provide discriminatory tax exemptions to any commercial operation or business except in any situation where the business provides essential services to a core military or law enforcement function of the United States.
- The United States shall not allocate fund any internal development except where the construction of such infrastructure provides a greater benefit to at least two states, repairs or enhances existing infrastructure or connects new territory to existing infrastructure.
Hmmm, Mike...
I can't help but note that the vast majority - 90% of so - of what you propose is already in there now; all it takes is an honest reading.
Oh, and maybe one word:
(See "Hologram of Liberty" by Ken Royce)
"expressly"
The 10th Amendment (as did the Articles of Confederation) was at one point to have wording which said "all powers not EXPRESSLY granted...are reserved to the States and the People..."
After the Committee of Style had their way, and that one word was eliminated, the "implied" powers have run amok for 200 years...
Why not just remove the franchise from anyone who is employed by or receives direct aid from any arm of government?
Take away the right of the people to vote themselves largesse from the government and you've elminated 90% of the government...
And I'd certainly flip #3 on its head... the judiciary is no more qualified to judge the constitutionality of statutes than is the Congress (which is why 90% of unconstitutional legislation is still on the books). I'd rather see judges impeached for assuming powers not their own than see elected officials tossed because our Robed High Priests decide society needs to change in accordance with Europeasn laws...
Ok, then what do you do in the meantime when you have unconstitutional laws on the books? Pray that the same idiots who passed them will suddenly learn to read for comprehension? I can't bet my rights on that. I'd rather let the judiciary judge the constitutionality of the laws than rely on the idiot electorate to make good decisions the next time. If you want to turn the Constitution into meaningless text, then the fastest way to do it is to provide only an electoral challenge to unconstitutional laws.
"If you want to turn the Constitution into meaningless text..."
The following paragraph appeared in the court's KELO decision last year:
"But although such a projected use would be sufficient to satisfy the public use requirement, this 'Court long ago rejected any literal requirement that condemned property be put into use for the general public.' Id., at 244. Indeed, while many state courts in the mid-19th century endorsed 'use by the public' as the proper definition of public use, that narrow view steadily eroded over time."
In other words, the court admits itself that the words don't mean anything, that they "erode over time," and that they are simply making it up as they go along. "Public Use" no longer means use by the public, "Interstate Commerce" need be neither interstate nor commercial. The Constitution, as much as I admire it and insist that it be followed literally in all circumstances no matter what, is a dead letter so far as our ruling class is concerned.
Perhaps you can teach the people to respect it once they are weaned from the government teat. But you cannot teach judges to respect it. That's been re-educated out of them already.
And it's ultimately Congress that put them there in the first place. The problem is the elected government, not the judiciary. There are a number of good lawyers who would make very libertarian judges. You're just not going to get that with the kind of scumbags we have in Congress and for a President right now.