The Government Follows a 3000-PAGE Constitution

You might be surprised to learn that the federal government does, by-and-large, follow the US Constitution–but not the one that was penned in 1787.

“Congress does follow the written Constitution,” said Gary Porter, who serves as the Executive Director of the Constitutional Leadership Initiative. He pulled a small booklet from his shirt pocket.

“This is a pocket Constitution,” he said. “It’s 4,400 words. About 7000 words if you count the amendments.” Porter then turned toward a large document on a nearby table. It looked like an encyclopedia.

“Here is the Constitution enforced today,” he said, flipping the book open with some effort.

“This is 3000 pages of Supreme Court rulings showing what every ruling has done to the original words.”

It’s called the Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation and is available for free on a government website, but a physical copy costs about $300. The document serves as the legal authority for everything that the federal government does.

“Every page represents a grant of power to the federal government,” Porter said.

“This isn’t going to get any smaller,” he said as he thumbed to the back of the monstrosity, revealing perhaps a hundred or more white pages. “Every time they publish this document, they leave a bunch of blank pages at the back for additional rulings that they know are coming.”

So if you think we just need to elect people who pledge to follow the Constitution, think again. With the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Commerce Clause and General Welfare Clause, in particular, Congress can do pretty much whatever it wants. And that’s just two clauses.

“This is the Constitution in operation today,” Porter said. “Unless we make its wording crystal clear, we will continue to operate under this document forever and ever until the whole house of cards comes falling down.”

Porter is a supporter of Convention of States Project. Under their resolution, the states can invoke Article V of the Constitution to establish new limits on the Supreme Court and restore the law of the land to the original Constitution.

Views: 1069

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Typing in to follow

can there be a better example of government falsely believing it's laws have more authority than nature/God's laws than this?

Constitutional Ignorance -- Perhaps Contempt
The Electoral College may be "undemocratic," but there's a good reason the Founders designed it that way.
January 17, 2018
Walter Williams

Hillary Clinton blamed the Electoral College for her stunning defeat in the 2016 presidential election in her latest memoirs, "What Happened?" Some have claimed that the Electoral College is one of the most dangerous institutions in American politics. Why? They say the Electoral College system, as opposed to a simple majority vote, distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population.

To back up their claim, they point out that the Electoral College gives, for example, Wyoming citizens disproportionate weight in a presidential election. Put another way, Wyoming, a state with a population of about 600,000, has one member in the U.S. House of Representatives and two members in the U.S. Senate, which gives the citizens of Wyoming three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people. California, our most populous state, has more than 39 million people and 55 electoral votes, or approximately one vote per 715,000 people. Comparatively, individuals in Wyoming have nearly four times the power in the Electoral College as Californians.

Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I'd say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be the president by majority rule is not democracy. But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution or any other of our founding documents.

How about a few quotations expressed by the Founders about democracy? In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, "Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." John Adams warned in a letter, "Remember Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a Democracy Yet, that did not commit suicide." Edmund Randolph said, "That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy." Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

The Founders expressed contempt for the tyranny of majority rule, and throughout our Constitution, they placed impediments to that tyranny. Two houses of Congress pose one obstacle to majority rule. That is, 51 senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators. The president can veto the wishes of 535 members of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto. To change the Constitution requires not a majority but a two-thirds vote of both houses, and if an amendment is approved, it requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures. Finally, the Electoral College is yet another measure that thwarts majority rule. It makes sure that the highly populated states — today, mainly 12 on the East and West coasts, cannot run roughshod over the rest of the nation. That forces a presidential candidate to take into consideration the wishes of the other 38 states.

Those Americans obsessed with rule by popular majorities might want to get rid of the U.S. Senate, where states, regardless of population, have two senators. Should we change representation in the House of Representatives to a system of proportional representation and eliminate the guarantee that each state gets at least one representative? Currently, seven states with populations of 1 million or fewer have one representative, thus giving them disproportionate influence in Congress. While we're at it, should we make all congressional acts be majority rule? When we're finished with establishing majority rule in Congress, should we then move to change our court system, which requires unanimity in jury decisions, to a simple majority rule?

My question is: Is it ignorance of or contempt for our Constitution that fuels the movement to abolish the Electoral College?

WallBuilders / David Barton
Published on Feb 1, 2018
We're excited to share an upcoming special on the Trinity Broadcast Network - America's Hidden History! It will air this Friday, February 2nd at 8pm & 11pm EST (7pm & 10pm CST). Mark your calendars and tune into TBN to join us!

Case Appealed to U.S. Supreme Court Asks If All 50 States Must Comply with U.S. Constitution’s Excessive Fines Clause
Indiana Supreme Court Ruled It May Impose Excessive Fines in Forfeiture Cases Until the U.S. Supreme Court Says It Can't

Press Release | February 1, 2018
John Kramer
Vice President for Communications

The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits excessive fines by the federal government. But does the same prohibition apply when state and local authorities impose the fine?

That is the question raised by a petition filed in the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday (January 31, 2...Continue reading at

Justice Thomas pleads for less “myth-making” of the court and justices

By Andrew Hamm on Feb 16, 2018 at 11:00 am

In an op-ed Thursday in the Los Angeles Times, law professor Rick Hasen suggested that “there is something disconcerting about Supreme Court justices becoming political rock stars.” He cautioned against turning the justices into gods and devils. Hasen isn’t the only commentator addressing the hagiography of the justices. Speaking on Monday at the University of Pennsylvania Law School as part of a panel that included Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick encouraged members of the media to reconsider recent portrayals of Ginsburg. She suggested that depictions of her as cultural icon and judicial celebrity reduce the complexity of her personality and contributions to the law.

Yesterday at the Law Library of Congress, Justice Clarence Thomas weighed in, echoing Hasen’s and Lithwick’s thoughts. Thomas said he regretted the “myth-making around the court and who we are” as justices and people, which has created a contrast between the “real world” of the Supreme Court and how it is portrayed outside the court. Judges and justices “don’t have the time, energy, or ink to engage in the narrative battles” ascribed to them by some in the media, Thomas said.

Journalists might write that a justice decided a case “callously” – especially a death penalty case – but “those are people who’ve never stayed up in the middle of the night voting on it,” Thomas continued.

Several times in his remarks with Judge Gregory Maggs of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, Thomas spoke about Justice Antonin Scalia. He said that Scalia and he “trusted each other so much” because “getting it right was important to both of us.”

Continue reading »

Think tariffs are a good idea? Mark Levin ends the debate once and for all
Debate over.

Posted March 5, 2018 by Phil Shiver

LevinTV host Mark Levin is not afraid to oppose terrible ideas, no matter who’s behind them. Monday night on his radio show, Levin broke down President Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports.

“Fair trade, you see, is raising taxes massively … on everything you purchase that has steel, aluminum, or lumber in it. That, they say, is fair trade ’cause it will punish the Chinese. It doesn’t punish the Chinese — it punishes you!” Levin exclaimed.

“And where do you think that money goes?” continued Levin. “Two places: It goes into the federal government, and these favored industries are able to jack up their prices.”

“At the root of this is a lack of understanding about liberty and capitalism, and it’s truly sad.” Levin added. “Because liberty and capitalism go to the core of this nation.”


Religious discrimination lawsuit claims mandatory flu shot caused woman 'severe emotional distress'

Congressional Research Service Report

Whose Line is it Anyway: Could Congress Give the President a Line-I..., CRS Legal Sidebar, March 27, 2018


ATF's Ability to Regulate "Bump Stocks", CRS Legal Sidebar, March 22, 2018

My Turn: Clay Johnson: A revolution fought for opportunity
By Clay Johnson
Posted Apr 24, 2018 at 6:17 PM
Updated Apr 24, 2018 at 6:17 PM

Robert Monroe died at sunrise on April 19, 1775. His death was one of the first that marked that day whose climax would be reached on that hill in Concord, Massachusetts. A short 243 years ago, the minutemen of the colonies had set our nation on the course to her birth.

A group of plucky Americans had gone eyeball-to-eyeball with the world's superpower. The colonists' belief in freedom was fortified by a practical desire to engage in commerce. By specializing in individual trades, they were able to work together.

Our nation's founders made a new life in a new world, and found purpose. Their revolution codified the first entrepreneur-state. The rules set forth in the Constitution provided the foundation for the innovation and prosperity that followed.

Today, it is not a foreign power that threatens our way of life, but an idea foreign to our founders. Modern-day progressives believe that Americans have so much wealth that it should be spread around. This is a euphemism for government intervention that forcibly takes from one person and gives to another.
Our free-enterprise system, which is founded on private ownership, is enshrined in our Constitution. The Constitution provides a framework that limits government intervention, protects individual liberties, and provides for a judicial system that resolves conflicts when rights clash. So, when progressives seek to use the threat of government coercion to take from one group to give to their supporters, they are undermining the intent of our entrepreneur-state.

Library of Congress

Book/Printed Material
Thomas Jefferson papers. Catalog Record - Electronic Resource Available At head of title: Presidential papers microfilm. Index (xxiii, 155 p. ; 29 cm.) published Washington : Manuscript Division, Library of Congress ; for sale by the Supt. of Docs., US GPO, 1976 in the series Presidents' papers index series (Supt. of Docs. no.: LC 4.7:J35; ISBN 0-8444-0135-8) (Z6616.J4U5 1974) Index to the Thomas Jefferson papers also available in electronic form on the Library...
  • Contributor: Jefferson, Thomas
  • Date: 1974


Latest Activity

Patricia Gillenwater replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"Lawrence, I do think conservatives are fighting back. There has been a lot of damage done and it…"
4 hours ago
luis✩USA replied to luis✩USA's discussion POLITICS...ARGH!
"Pat, ;)  They are all one big sappy family, aren't they. Now, as for the way the…"
10 hours ago
Patricia Gillenwater replied to luis✩USA's discussion POLITICS...ARGH!
"Luis, Right on target as usual. LOL I love the reference to GOPee-ons, wild-poon-hound Bill…"
11 hours ago
Patricia Gillenwater replied to American912's discussion Federalism: The Case for Reinvigorating State's Rights
"Thanks for the link AM912. Now I am for CA to be broken into different states and then for the…"
11 hours ago
Patricia Gillenwater replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"Totally agree!"
16 hours ago
Patricia Gillenwater replied to LANYON's discussion IRS Tea Party persecutor Lois Lerner had help all along: McCain
"I made a steam vent about this last night. McCain can we even hold a fleeting thought that he is a…"
16 hours ago
Patricia Gillenwater replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"Suzie, Yes McCain is and has been a scumbag and so to has Flake. In the 2016 election cycle talking…"
16 hours ago
LANYON posted discussions
17 hours ago
Norma J. Sears replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"Pat, This confirms the fact that there is a majority (one party) operating against ciizens in…"
18 hours ago
luis✩USA replied to luis✩USA's discussion POLITICS...ARGH!
"EXCLUSIVE – Nearly 60,000 immigrants with arrest records -- including 10 accused of murder --…"
19 hours ago
luis✩USA replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"Btw: a rescission measure led by Senator Mike Lee (C-UT) and other consvatives that would have…"
20 hours ago
luis✩USA replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
""We came out at election time but since many have backed away. " Lawrence, I've…"
20 hours ago
luis✩USA replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"JUNE 23, 1988 This the 30th Anniversary of when the new father of "Global Warming", NASA…"
22 hours ago
luis✩USA replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"ditto!  ;)"
22 hours ago
Patricia Gillenwater replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"This has steam coming out of my ears. John McCain is a despicable…"
Patricia Gillenwater replied to Suzie Nielsen's discussion The Steam Room
"Haven't noticed a popup lately."

Volcano's and Earthquakes

© 2018   Created by Suzie Nielsen.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service