@Pwnitz @albert9x19 @vega_holdings The government is restricted by the bill of rights, they do not grant the government authority to restrict rights. They do not grant rights, they protect rights.

@Pwnitz @albert9x19 @vega_holdings What does that have to do with the people's rights?

@Pwnitz @albert9x19 @vega_holdings No, the 14A applies the bill of rights to the states.

@Rothmus ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

RT @ThomasSowell: "The essence of liberalism is to empower the individual. Yet, ironically, an oversized government can do the opposite, st…

RT @TheRabbitHole84: Thomas Sowell on the welfare state

@Pwnitz @albert9x19 @vega_holdings The federal government (states via 14A and article VI) lack the authority you seek from them. Your opinion and the opinion of Congress has no bearing on the authority granted. Go cry somewhere else.

@shlevy The government has to authority beyond what it was specially granted. You can fuck off. When you can agree that words mean what they say, we can begin, begin, to start to make amends.

That's fair. I didn't check your math, but... My point is that eventually we will run out, if we have not. It was never intended to be an identification document. I conceed that they may in fact have enough numbers now. I know the math enough to know that it has a limit going forward that is a limited numbers of generations away.

@RoleighMartin @GraemeRodaughan @NutlawPete @elonmusk Yeah, converting it to hex would probably solve the problem with minimal to no impact.

Your feelings do not dictate the power and authority of the federal government. You are free to support any cause you like. Raise awareness, donate, volunteer, etc. The fedgovt only has the authority it was granted; all other authority is retained by the people, and sometimes the state. Not the fedgovt.

They get to apply the law, they cannot interpret it. They can only interpret in the sense of how the law or constitution applies to the case before them. It's a subtle distinction, but one I think is important. They can't interpret shall not be infringed does not mean what it means.

@CynicalPublius Should have never existed, not because it was good/bad, but because it was beyond the authority granted. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I think it's gone too far to do anything but rip the bandaid off. It's like 100 years of twisting precedent to give the perception that any of that is within the scope of authority granted. Wickard v. Filburn and NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. Being big ones that misconstrued prior opinions. The commerce clause was never intended to reach beyond the infrastructure to keep things moving. The laws implementing this aid and grants and such, were never constitutional and this do not legally exist. It may suck, but it is what it is. The fedgov only has the authority granted and Congress cannot expand or shrink that authority.

@ProgressingCali @BasedMikeLee It's not clear to me where US Congress has any legitimate constitutional authority to fund, well, pretty much anything outside of itself.

@HaythamKenway99 It violates the 9A.

Is Congress unaware? They can read the constitution, see that it's a legislative authority, ask themselves (or read the EO) from where is he drawing this authority. (Conveniently cited in the EO). Has he followed the congressional law? (Conditional or not). I guess you could argue he buried the citations deep in the 1st paragraph. Expecting that almost nobody will read that far into a boring EO anyway.

@the_carlosdp @growing_daniel @EV_Trapper Just because Congress passes a law, doesn't make it exist.

@eisingerj Unconstitutional laws and rulings are void. You can't defy that which does not exist. Anything outside of their granted authority is not valid, it does not exist.

RT @DefiyantlyFree: You feel bad for children in Afghanistan who don’t get LGBTQ Sesame Street. I feel bad for children in America, who a…