The Constitution in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law of the Land
Andrew P. Napolitano
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
What ever happened to our inalienable rights?
The Constitution was once the bedrock of our country, an unpretentious parchment that boldly established the God-given rights and freedoms of America. Today that parchment has been shred to ribbons, explains Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, as the federal government trounces state and individual rights and expands its reach far beyond what the Framers intended.
An important follow-up to Judge Napolitano's best-selling Constitutional Chaos, this book shows with no-nonsense clarity how Congress has "purchased" regulations by bribing states and explains how the Supreme Court has devised historically inaccurate, logically inconsistent, and even laughable justifications to approve what Congress has done.
It's an exciting excursion into the dark corners of the law, showing how do-gooders, busybodies, and control freaks in government disregard the limitations imposed upon Congress by the Constitution and enact laws, illegal and unnatural, in virtually every area of human endeavor.
Praise for The Constitution in Exile from Left, Right, and Center
"Does anyone understand the vision of America's founding fathers? The courts and Congress apparently don't have a clue. But Judge Andrew P. Napolitano does, and so will you, if you read The Constitution in Exile."-BILL O'REILLY
"Whatever happened to states rights, limited government, and natural law? Judge Napolitano, in his own inimitable style, takes us on a fascinating tour of the destruction of constitutional government. If you want to know how the federal government got so big and fat, read this book. Agree or disagree, this book will make you think."-SEAN HANNITY
"In all of the American media, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano is the most persistent, uncompromising guardian of both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution, very much including the Bill of Rights. Increasingly, our Constitution is in clear and present danger. Judge Napolitano--in The Constitution in Exile--has challenged all Americans across party lines to learn the extent of this constitutional crisis." -NAT HENTOFF
"Judge Napolitano engages here in what I do every day on my program-make you think. There's no question that potential Supreme Court nominees and what our Constitution says and doesn't say played a major role for many voters in our last couple of elections. What the judge does here is detail why the federal government claims it can regulate as well as tax everything in sight as it grows and grows. Agree or disagree with him-you need to read his latest book, think, and begin to arm yourself as you enter this important debate." -RUSH LIMBAUGH
"At a time when we are, in Benjamin Franklin's words, sacrificing essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, here comes the judge with what should be mandatory reading for the executive branch cronies who are busy stealing power while they think we're not watching. Thank goodness the judge is watching and speaking truth to power. More than a book, this is an emergency call to philosophical arms, one we must heed before it's too late." -ALAN COLMES
United States, ♣, ♦ mortgage, ♣, ♦–♥, ♠, †, ‡, Δ, ∇, Ο Muslim, ♣–♦, ♥ N National Labor Relations Board, ♣–♦ National Security Agency, ♣ Naturalization, Rule of, ♣ Nebbia v. New York, ♣, ♦ Nevada, ♣, ♦–♥, ♠ New Deal, ♣, ♦, ♥, ♠, †, ‡–Δ, ∇–Ο, ◊, [L11], [L12], [L13], [L14]–[L15] New Hampshire, ♣ New Jersey, ♣, ♦, ♥–♠ New Orleans, ♣, ♦, ♥ New York, ♣, ♦, ♥–♠, †–‡, Δ, ∇, Ο, ◊, [L11], [L12]–[L13], [L14], [L15], [L16]–[L17], [L18], [L19], [L20]–[L21] New York City, ♣, ♦–♥, ♠–†, ‡, Δ New
citizens the ability to own property in America. When the Supreme Court heard the case, it ruled that Lord Fairfax’s heirs were entitled to the property, but the state court in Virginia, where the lawsuit began, declined to obey the decision of the Supreme Court. Here’s the question: Could the Supreme Court extend its power of review to decisions of state courts, and thus to affirm or to reverse them? Put differently, can the Supreme Court of the United States hear an appeal from the highest
wheat each farmer could grow. At the same time, under Stalin’s rule the central planners in Moscow were dictating to farmers all over the USSR how much wheat they could produce. The American secretary of agriculture set the national wheat allotment, just as his Soviet counterpart did. The American allotment divided wheat among the states, then among counties and individual farmers, just as Soviet allotments did. In May 1941, the secretary of agriculture publicly announced an increase in the
possession of marijuana,” making no exceptions for medical use. In 2002, the feds entered Monson’s home to seize and destroy her six marijuana plants. Monson and Raich filed suit seeking “to prohibit the enforcement of the federal Controlled Substances Act.” In arguing the case, the government blew smoke aboutWickardand the Court inhaled. The Court said, “As we stated inWickard‘even if appellee’s activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature,
the colonies without their consent. They argued against it “as a matter of right,” and distinguished it from Parliament’s power to regulate trade. Parliament had the right to regulate trade and commerce by taxation, but the colonists protested taxation for any other reasons. After the Stamp Act was repealed, Parliament tried again with the Townshend duties, which were also enacted for the purpose of raising revenue. The colonists rejected paying the duties. The Contintinental Congress consented