Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, June 30, 2006

Congress Unconstitutionally Usurps Judicial Power

Congress does not have any power to make conclusions of law.

This is an exclusive Judicial Power, which neither the Executive nor the Congress has been delegated any power to exercise.

* * *

The following comment is meaningless:

(2) finds that the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program has been conducted in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and Executive Orders, that appropriate safeguards and reviews have been instituted to protect individual civil liberties, and that Congress has been appropriately informed and consulted for the duration of the Program and will continue its oversight of the Program; Ref

Here's what we don't know, and the courts have not reviewed:

  • How the information gleaned from the data mining is subsequently used to target Americans for illegal monitoring and warrantless interrogations;

  • Which other sources and methods are used to illegally thwart the express requirements in the Constitution.

    * * *

    Congress has no lawful power or authority to "review" the "legality" of the program. This is an exclusive judicial function.

    The sense of Congress is meaningless, however telling. It shows Congress has usurped judicial power, and wants the voters to believe something that is not true.

    Congress does not have a presumption of Constitutionality. Rather, when Congress usurps judicial power and "makes findings" that something is or isn't legal, that is meaningless.

    No voter should have any confidence in this Congress. It defers to the illegal war, continues to appropriate funds for unlawful things, refuses to investigate, then adjudicates whether something is or isn't legal.

    * * *

    This is related and warrants a comment.

    Even if Congress makes a "rule" that the courts cannot do something, what is Congress thinking in asserting that the Court cannot review the Constitutionality of something?

    Marbury is the precedent for Judicial review; and it is in the Constitution: The Courts have the sole power to adjudicate. Congress may not make a law that strips the Judiciary of this power.

    Not only can Congress not lawfully pass this bill; there is nothing within that bill or any other Constitutional provision that would recognize the bill, or otherwise prohibit the Courts from striking down the bill.

    Overall, any Congressional claim that they will make rules that will ignore the laws and defy the courts is not to be taken seriously. Indeed, if the Congress chooses to do this, we have to ask, "Why bother?" Congress and the Executive have already shown they will ignore the FISA and Constitution; there's no need for them to put in writing what they're already doing.

    Rather, the issue is why they are bothering to codify unconstitutional conduct for the courts to adjudicate.

    * * *

    Flashback . . .


    Consider the DoD approach to Iraqi contracts. Recall how DoD excluded people from the contracting arena because they would not bend to the whims of the Executive.

    The lesson is that the Executive, when it fires the experts, will attempt to construct a program that doesn't follow the law, but they'll do their best to follow the checklists.

    Sort of. They got it really wrong.

    Not only do they ignore the law, but they can't be relied upon to independently conduct their contract planning without help.

    * * *

    Back to the Congressional "big plan" to make rules that defy Geneva . . .


    A. Is the Congressional proposal credible: Mixed signals.

    B. Does it have the force of law: No.

    C. What is to be done if the courts refuse to (timely) strike down what is Unconstitutional: Broaden Constellation to gather facts for Judicial impeachment, per Federalist 78.

    The Congress, if it is asserting this power to make laws that violate Geneva, will send a clear signal to the world: The US is not serious about honoring agreements to remain civil. The implications are serious: [ Click ]

    Because of reckless leadership within the Executive Branch, the US is on the run in Afghanistan and Iraq. The world sees that the US is not all-powerful, just all-bungling.

    The world now knows it can unite against the reckless, arrogant American bullies and there's nothing that the US can do about it.

    The US has exhausted the goodwill it once had in the wake of 9-11.

    * * *

    Except for a few pockets of individual integrity, Congress has no credibility, nor real leadership. There is little catalyst for Congress to rise to the occasion, protect the Constitution and assert their oath.

    They simply rely on more non-sense from the White House propagandists, continuing in their quest for excuses to not do what should be done.

    Given all that is going against Congress, why are they doing what they're doing? It appears Congress believes they can fool the voters.

    They have made a grave error. The voters have figured this out. Congress is part of the problem, and they are engaging in shams, not asserting their Constitutional obligations or oaths.

    We the People will have to plan for what should be done, then make it happen. If We fail, others are prepared to make it happen.