September 04, 2006

Congress recently passed, and President Bush signed, The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005. The stated purpose of the act is: "To ensure that the right of an individual to display the flag of the United States on residential property not be abridged." While this language sounds real patriotic and all that stuff, the Act is nothing but another attempt to pander to voters in the name of patriotism because the Constitution does not grant Congress any general jurisdiction over flags or residential property within one of the United States.

The legislation, which originated in the House of Representatives, is subject to House Rule XIII, Section 3(d)(1). This rule requires that all committee reports contain "a statement citing the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution." A legislative review of the Act noted: "A committee report citing constitutional authority is unavailable." In the author's opinion, the failure to comply with this simple requirement was an acknowledgement that there is no constitutional authority for the legislation.

Not only does Congress lack the constitutional authority to exercise this power within the 50 United States, but the Act might be one of the strangest pieces of legislation I have ever reviewed. Section 3 states:

"A condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association may not adopt or enforce any policy, or enter into any agreement, that would restrict or prevent a member of the association from displaying the flag of the United States on residential property within the association with respect to which such member has a separate ownership interest or a right to exclusive possession or use."

Or what? Nowhere in the legislation is an enforcement provision included or referenced. So what federal law, civil or criminal, would one of these associations "be violating" if they prevented an individual from displaying the flag of the United States? Is it some secret provision that only Congress knows about or are the federal flag police going show up in the dead of night and require the offending association to write "we will not restrict the right of the people to display the flag of the United States" fifty times on a blackboard?

Even if the Act was a valid exercise of power, the lack of an enforcement provision creates another problem. What is the remedy for the offended party to right the alleged wrong? Since the Act is completely silent on this issue and there is no reference to any other federal law, what purpose does the legislation serve?

Another problem with the legislation is the attempt to restrict the right of the referenced associations to engage in a contract. Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress granted the general authority to control or interfere with private contracts within the several States. These clowns are so arrogant that they think their powers are unlimited.

When this legislation is challenged and declared unconstitutional, who will members of Congress and the American people blame---Congress or some federal judge? We all know the answer. Members of Congress will hold press conferences surrounded by American flags and claim the federal judiciary is out of control while they hold themselves blameless for enacting the unconstitutional legislation in the first place.

The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, while it sounds reasonable, is just another usurpation of power in the name of patriotism because the Constitution does not grant Congress the power to enforce it within the 50 United States.

Robert Greenslade focuses his writing on issues surrounding the federal government and the Constitution. He believes politicians at the federal level, through ignorance or design, are systematically dismantling the Constitution in an effort to expand their power and consolidate control over the American people. He has dedicated himself to resurrecting the true intent of the Constitution in the hope that the information will contribute, in some small way, to restoring the system of limited government established by the Constitution.

If you are interested in finding out more about the Constitution, take a look at this book. I use it in many of my articles and it is the best book I've found on this subject. Bob

The Federal Government: Its True Nature and Character: Being a Review of Judge Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States.

Reprint of the 1868 edition. ''Perhaps the ablest analysis of the nature and character of the federal government that has ever been published. It has remained unanswered.'' This review of Judge Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States is perhaps the ablest analysis of the nature and character of the Federal Government that has ever been published. It has remained unanswered. Indeed, we are not aware that any attempt has been made to challenge the soundness of its reasoning. The great vise of Judge Story and the Federalists consisted in desiring the clothe the federal government with almost monarchical power, whereas the States had carefully and resolutely reserved the great mass of political power for themselves. The powers which they delegated to the federal government were few, and were general in their character. Those which they reserved embraced their original and inalienable sovereignty, which no state imagined it was surrendering when it adopted the constitution. Mr. Madison dwelt with great force upon the fact that ''a delegated is not a surrendered power.'' The states surrendered no powers to the federal government -- they only delegated them. 160 pages.

Archives

The ·2004 Declaration of Independence

The Constitution and YOU Part 1

The Constitution and YOU Part 2

The Constitution and YOU Part 3

Even God is Engaged in Interstate Commerce

The Second Amendment and the Preamble to the Bill of Rights

Another Look at the Wording of the Second Amendment

Are the Constitutions of the Several States Unconstitutional?

Massachusetts' Mandatory Health Insurance Bill Is Unconstitutional

The Militia Clause of the Constitution Negates the "Collective Right" Interpretation of the Second Amendment

No Senator Clinton - Government is the one Squeezing Consumers

Complete Archives for Robert Greenslade