Originally Posted by rockinbbar
James Wilson, stated:

Quote
“I leave it to every gentleman to say whether the enumerated powers are not as accurately and MINUTELY DEFINED, as can be well done on the same subject, in the same language…nor does it, in any degree, go beyond the particular enumeration; for, when it is said that Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper, those words are LIMITED AND DEFINED by the following, “for carrying into execution the foregoing powers”, it is saying no more than that the powers we have already particularly given (enumerated), shall be effectually carried into execution.”

Did you get that? Many people claim that congress was vested with powers to do whatever it damn well pleased, in other words, to pass the laws that it sees fit to pass for whatever reason, or no reason, because the people, from which all power flows, elected them to pass laws, by majority vote, and that if there was any conflict with the constitution, the unlimited powers of congress would trump all other considerations. Many federalists today, claim that congress is the most powerful entity in the land because they can overcome executive vetoes and Supreme Court decisions by obtaining enough votes to overturn them.

The proponents of federal land control like to cite a Supreme Court decision which gave congress power “without limitation” to do what it wants with land. United States v. City of San Francisco, 310 U.S. 16, 29 (1940).

But, Wilson is saying that is not the case. Congress does not have unlimited powers with land or anything else. Congress cannot exceed the enumerated powers granted to it by the supreme law of the land, the constitution. The only way congress can get around those enumerated powers is by constitutional amendment which requires ratification by 2/3 of the states.

Under the Property Clause, congress had power given to it to “dispose” of property that it had acquired through treaty. It had a right to retain property for the purpose of fulfilling its limited mission as enumerated, i.e, forts, docks, navies, armies, post offices, etc. But, millions of acres of land owned by the federal government is in direct opposition to Madison’s statement, “few and defined”.

Any other "theories" you were going to plagarize for us today?

Have any of your own thoughts on the matter?

Didn't think so....

Last edited by BuzzH; 02/07/23.