And impeach the president: The political and economic blog of a strict constitutionalist.

Do you like this blog? Please plus-1 it

If you like this blog, please use Google's "+1" button to help others see it.
If you do not see a button, please click here

Sunday, February 21, 2010

First draft of proposed amendment

This does not look like typical amendments to the constitution. But this gives us a place to start from. Please, make comments.

This is half of it.

Amendment nnn

Section 1. Intent and purpose
The intent and purpose of this amendment is to clarify the relationship and relative powers of the constitution, the judiciary and legislative branches, the relative rights of individuals, groups, and corporations, and the effect of interstate commerce by corporations and state jurisdiction.

Additionally, this amendment seeks to clarify the meaning of "people" as used in the 14th amendment and enforce the 3rd section of the 14th amendment.

Section 2. Definition of "people"
A: People, or person, as used in the constitution, refers to natural people. It explicitly excludes robots, artificial intelligence devices, corporations, or any other created entity.

B: The 14th amendment grants representation in congress based on persons; no such enumeration to date has counted corporations or other artificial legal entity for representation. It is recognized as existing constitution that corporations are not persons.
C: The court decision, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, does not make a ruling on the issue of personhood of the corporation in question. It does not set any precedence in this issue. In declaring that the court would not hear arguments on the issue because all members of the court were prejudiced, it recognized that no such fair hearing could be held, and ruled instead narrowly on the issue of tax value of land and the improvements thereof.

Section 3. Section 3 of the 14th amendment
1. The 14th amendment, section three, states, "No person ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same". It is recognized that "insurrection or rebellion against the same" includes both taking official action of office in defiance of, or that contradicts, the Constitution of the United States, as well as inaction when required by the duties of office; and that this section of the 14th amendment permits removal from office for failing to uphold the oath of office.
2. A majority vote of either house of Congress shall suffice to act as an indictment of this issue. Per the 14th amendment, Congress may pass legislation to determine the manner of trial; until such legislation is passed, the rules of impeachment of Article One shall be used.
3. It is explicitly recognized that Congress may pass legislation, by two-thirds of each house, placing limitations on the removal from office. Lacking any such legislation, the 14th amendment does not permit any failure to uphold the oath of office, but requires 100% perfect performance to avoid indictment, and whatever standard is held by either the Senate's impeachment process, or whatever legislation is passed by Congress to implement said trial. Congress is advised to pass some sort of legislation to recognize "good effort" or the fact that humans are not infallible, and is further advised to use the "three-strikes" laws passed by states as a basis for such ruling -- three errors over a person's lifespan with no forgiveness of such errors. Should the states change their "three-strikes" laws to permit forgiveness of errors, then Congress should adjust such legislation to match.

Section 4. Authority of the constitution over all three branches of government
None of the branches of government -- including the supreme court -- may issue any ruling or decision that contradicts the constitution. The only valid method for modifying the constitution is the amendment process of Article Five. No past decision of any age that contradicts the constitution shall remain valid upon discovery and challenge.

Section 5. 
Article One grants "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States". No other branch of government has any authority to create law, or do to any other legislative act identified in Article One. The "Duck Test" shall be used to determine this --- if an action of either the Judiciary or the Executive branch results in something that behaves like a law, affecting all of the United States, then it is in violation of Article One unless Congress has delegated such authority and such delegation is valid. No new authority to delegate is created by this clause.

This is about half of what's needed; more to come.

1 comment:

Michael Gersten said...

So elsewhere, someone asked about clones.

If someone wants to create spare body parts by creating a clone, is that considered a valid medical procedure -- in which case a clone is just a way to make spare body parts, and a clone is not a person, and does not have the rights of a person -- or is it not a valid medical procedure, and clones have the same rights as natural born people?

The scary thing? I can see people making reasonable arguments in both directions.