MetaFilter posts tagged with constitution and government

9/11 changed everything? And the NSA is only looking at overseas and terrorist-related phone and internet records?

amberglow — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 12:04:00 -0800

to gather information about Americans' phone records --... the NSA had approached the company (Qwest) about participating in a warrantless surveillance program to gather information about Americans' phone records. ...Nacchio's account, which places the NSA proposal at a meeting on Feb. 27, 2001, suggests that the Bush administration was seeking to enlist telecommunications firms in programs without court oversight before the terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The Sept. 11 attacks have been cited by the government as the main impetus for its warrantless surveillance efforts. ... -- The Administration's crimes and illegal spying on all of us and Quest's punishment for not going along with their plans.

Con vs. Con

brain_drain — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 21:00:51 -0800

But Is It War? A vigorous debate among three conservatives about the limits of post-9/11 executive power.

Frankenlaw!

escabeche — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:22:27 -0800

The partial veto , enshrined in the Wisconsin Constitution since 1930, gives the governor the power to veto only a portion of a bill passed by the legislature. Since then, governors, both Republican and Democratic, have gotten increasingly creative about its application -- vetoing the word "not" to reverse the meaning of a bill, vetoing digits out of numbers to reduce appropriations, even vetoing individual letters from words in order to create new text, Humument-style. (This last power, the so-called "Vanna White" veto, was removed by Constitutional amendment in 1990.) Another attempt to strip the governor of the partial veto has just failed. Doesn't it sound like fun to be governor of Wisconsin? Try it yourself.

Bush vs The US Constitution

knave — Wed, 03 May 2006 15:32:31 -0800

Power Surge: The Constitutional Record of George W. Bush Not much of this report from the Cato institute will be surprising to MeFites, but it is a great document [31 page PDF] that summarizes Bush's consistent disregard for the Constitution and drive for greater executive power.

Rule of Law?

amberglow — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:50:44 -0800

...Bush has been aggressive about declaring his right to ignore vast swaths of laws -- many of which he says infringe on power he believes the Constitution assigns to him alone ... President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution. ... Long, eyeopening article laying out what laws have been ignored and why. ...Bush has cast a cloud over 'the whole idea that there is a rule of law," because no one can be certain of which laws Bush thinks are valid and which he thinks he can ignore. 'Where you have a president who is willing to declare vast quantities of the legislation that is passed during his term unconstitutional, it implies that he also thinks a very significant amount of the other laws that were already on the books before he became president are also unconstitutional," ...

even posting "Pepsi Blue" would make us liable.

amberglow — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 22:08:45 -0800

"Drove my Chevy to the levee..."? That's a lawsuit. "Pass the Courvoisier"? Yup. Lawsuit too. Artwork using Barbie Dolls? Lawsuit again... It's all part of the Trademark Dilution Revision Act, which would eliminate the non-commercial "fair use" protections of trademarks in art, literature, and speech-- To amend the Trademark Act of 1946 with respect to dilution by blurring or tarnishment. It goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee on the 16th, and there's a large roster of groups fighting it, including the American Library Association, EFF, and more, saying that consumers as well as artists would be preventing from exercising their free speech rights unless it's amended.

The Story of the 27th Amendment

Dr. Zira — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 09:46:22 -0800

The Forgotten Amendment: The story of the 27th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. Back in 1982, while doing research for a government class, UT Austin student Gregory Watson stumbled across an unratified constitutional amendment from 1789. Noticing that the amendment had had no time limit for ratification, Mr. Watson embarked upon a campaign to amend the U. S. Constitution. Sadly, Watson only earned a "C" on his paper for government class, in which he'd argued the amendment was still viable.

CaliFilter

magullo — Thu, 18 Nov 2004 06:07:44 -0800

AmendforArnold&Jen
Founded by a libertarian-turned RINO and a member of the Green Party

oissubke — Sun, 29 Sep 2002 22:09:45 -0800

Do you know what the Second Amendment actually says? UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh presents a remarkably clear, educated, and non-inflammatory explanation of the amendment, including plenty of historical references. As with my previous post (about Liberalism and Conservativism), I submit this not to promote a viewpoint, but to (hopefully) educate those who would debate about it.

jammer — Tue, 08 May 2001 11:25:13 -0800

Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) has introduced into the house HJR 45, being termed the Liberty Ammendment, which would not only expressly prohibit the federal government from engaging in any enterprise except as provided for in the Constitution, but would also repeal the 16th Ammendment. [That's the one that made legitimate the income tax, after the US had managed to survive without one for a century and a half]