The Constitution in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law of the Land
Where to buy The Constitution in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law of the Land books online?
- ISBN13: 9781595550705
- Condition: NEW
- Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
Product Description
What ever happened to our inalienable rights?
The Constitution was once the levelheaded rock of our country, an unpretentious parchment that boldly customary the God-agreed rights and freedoms of America. Today that parchment has been shred to ribbons, clarifies 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 proposed.
An vital follow-up to Judge Napolitano’s best-selling Constitutional Chaos, this book shows with no-nonsense clarity how Congress has “bought” regulations by bribing states and clarifies 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 know the vision of America’s founding fathers? The courts and Congress rumor has it that 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 unique style, takes us on a fascinating tour of the destruction of constitutional government. If you want to know how the federal government got so huge and stout, read this book. Agree or disagree, this book will make you reflect.”-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 reflect. 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, reflect, and start to arm yourself as you enter this vital debate.” -RUSH LIMBAUGH
“At a time when we are, in Benjamin Franklin’s words, sacrificing essential liberty to buy a small temporary safety, here comes the judge with what should be mandatory reading for the executive branch cronies who are busy stealing power while they reflect we’re not watching. Thank goodness the judge is watching and language truth to power. More than a book, this is an urgent situation call to philosophical arms, one we must heed before it’s too late.” -ALAN COLMES
Buy Cheap The Constitution in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law of the Land Online
Related posts:
- Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. the Supreme Court
- Downsizing the Federal Government
- Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History
- The Three Laws of Performance: Rewriting the Future of Your Organization and Your Life
- Seized: A Sea Captain’s Adventures Battling Scoundrels and Pirates While Recovering Stolen Ships in the World’s Most Troubled Waters
Could not end the book. I reflect it was not only biased with too much of his personal feelings, but written in a way that was very uninteresting for the reader. Got the book based on his appearances on the Oreilly Factor but was very disappointed. If you are a moderate conservative like most Americans you probably will not like this nor his interpretation of the constitution.
Reader’s Rating: 1 / 5
While neither the founder nor the leading fan of the so-called “Constitution in Exile” movement (persons distinctions belonging respectively to Judges Douglas Ginsberg and Robert Bork), Judge Napolitano but does a fine job laying out the principle opinion of this conservative officially authorized philosophy.
In a nut shell, the “Constitution in Exile” movement argues that the 20th century brought a shift in the balance of political power away from the states and towards the federal government. In particular, they condemn the increased regulatory power granted to congress and to federal agencies during the New Deal through an expansive reading of the commerce clause. That this shift in power occurred remains undeniable; nor was it likely imagined by the Framers who existing in a largely agrarian 18th century economy could hardly imagine the realities and supplies of an manufacturing and post-manufacturing economy. But, the further argument, that such a division of power is inherently in conflict with the Constriction remains a more questionable proposition. While Napolitano does fine work offering the opinion for his position, he does far less to defend against the challenges of persons who disagree with his school of thought.
Judge Napolitano sees the threat to constitution as coming from two quarters, the federal government vs. the citizenry and the federal government vs. the states. The ex- is novel, since Ginsberg, Bork and their peers tend to focus on the latter. Here Napolitano looks at the Patriot Act as an example of an overreaching government ignoring citizens’ rights to due process and judicial protection.
The latter position really stands as the more controversial. For advocates of the Constitution in Exile movement, the Federal Government continues to encroach on State’s constitutional prerogatives upsetting a delicate federal balance envisioned by the Framers. As Napolitano writes, the Constitution is a compact among the states, not the individual citizens. While he sees this as clear, historians and philosophers can debate it all the way back to the framers. Indeed, the reason the Founding Fathers, led in this instance by Alexander Hamilton, insisted that the constitution be approved by State conventions rather than state legislatures was their opinion that the federal government derives its power directly from the people. Moreover, Napolitano and his comrades seem to be fighting a battle on this front that was settled by the Civil War and 14th Amendment that followed in its wake, an amendment expressly stating that citizens of the United State as citizens of a federal government and not merely citizens of constituent states. While the Supreme Court in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, as well as several members of the Renquist Court, may doubt the notion of Congressional supremecy, the drafters of the 14th Amendment understood the thought reasonably clearly.
Moreover, Napolitano and his ilk fail to know the Constitution is at least as much a political document as it is a officially authorized one. The Framers likely did not envision the thought of the FDA or federal standards for food safety, but that does not make such thinks per se alien to the Constitutional scheme. Moreover, such entities are not creations of some distant imperial federal overseer, but are enacted by the people effective through their congressional representatives. Thus the Supreme Court in the New Deal failed to know that they were protecting the prerogative of State actors and large cooperate interests, they were at the same time acting against the desires of the overwhelming majority of the citizenry. Men like Hamilton, desirous of a robust central government capable of binding the union and promoting integration, doubtless would have approved of the thought of a federal government setting national standards. Napolitano cringes at Congress also using its budgeting power to “encourage” states to enact unitary policies such as drinking ages, but what he considers blackmail stands more benignly as the efforts of political actors using the powers at their disposal to enact the ends they desire. The Framers, conceivers of a practical political scheme, may not have expected the post-manufacturing age, but they did know politics and political actors.
Napolitano deserves credit for producing a work less polemical than persons of Bork to clarify the “Constitution in Exile” concept. But, the theory requires a more robust defense than the one offered here if it expects to gain greater currency. For persons looking for an introduction, no additional work stands as superior to this work, but that only goes so far.
Reader’s Rating: 3 / 5
In a way I don’t care because the one giant problem the US government has is massive debt. That issue is tackled in the book “Empire of Debt” which is sold on Amazon.com.
But, I pretty much agree with everything written in this book. But, I know most of the fleeting comings with our courts and laws.
I was sitting in a law class and we were covering evidence and illegal interrogations. This case dates back to the ’60s.
A man did a kidnapping. They knew the girl was murdered. So, as the officers were driving the man to jail they said to one another “she deserves a excellent Christian burial rather than being eaten by magpies”. The suspect broke down and showed the body to the police.
The courts threw out the dead body as evidence. The courts ruled that using guilt in getting a confession was cruel and unjustified.
So rather than letting this brutal murderer out of jail the state made an appeal. The case was re-argued in front of the same court members. In the exact same case the courts ruled that the finding of the body was officially authorized for use as evidence because of the proof of a “methodic search”.
The lawyer who was instructing us on this series of cases made a “pulling it out of their mouth” motion.
The chilling conclusion swept the room. The law is anything the courts say it is. We live in a judicial fiat.
This book is informative to the people who don’t know much about Federal law. But, it’s a small dry to persons of us who sat in evidence classes and seen the results of judicial fiat.
I permanently marvel why some grief filled parent does not take revenge on an elitist judge.
A excellent leftist lawyer could get them off.
Reader’s Rating: 5 / 5
If you do care about the constitution then read this book. People on the left and right are permanently accusing each additional of manipulating it, well that just goes to show that perhaps both are a small guilty, and this book finally drives home some serious things. The best part is that it is factual and therefore informative and edcuations to all the emo-cons who are running around repeating the same dogma to everyone about what they reflect is the truth, which of course they get from CNN headlines and the NY Times not that I am naming names of news sources that suffer from extreme manipulation or anything.
Reader’s Rating: 5 / 5
Judge Napolitano commicated what I been seeing take place. He has the officially authorized background to clarify how the Federal Government has sized power that was never proposed for them to have.
Reader’s Rating: 4 / 5