Senate Democrats pulled the nuclear option earlier
this week. They are fully aware that the
American people have caught onto their shenanigans. Barack Obama is officially a lame duck and
the Republicans have a chance to win the Senate. The Democrats need a failsafe plan that will
further their socialist ideology without having to go through the legislative
process. They need the D.C. Circuit
Court of Appeals to rubber stamp Obama’s administrative state.
The progressives for over a hundred years schemed to
circumvent the U.S. Constitution. They needed
a way to bypass Congress. They needed federal
bureaucracies that can act independent of the legislative process. They need an administrative state. President Woodrow Wilson gave them a vision
even he admitted is alien to the American people:
But where has this science grown up? Surely not
on this side of the sea….American writers have hitherto taken no very important
part in the advancement of this science. It has found its doctors in Europe. It
is not of our making; it is a foreign science, speaking very little of the
language of English or American principles….It has been developed by French and
German professors.
Many are asking what law allowed the executive
branch to accumulate all this power while abrogating Congress’s constitutional
responsibilities. It is called the
Administrative Procedures Act of 1946.
This law gave federal agencies a free hand in
writing, implementing and enforcing rules and regulations. They can do this with little input from the general
public or our representatives.
In 1947, the department
of justice issued the Attorney General's Manual on the
Administrative Procedure Act. This
document provides insight regarding the application of the act and remains valuable
as a research tool to this day. Some of the information contained in this
manual provides analysis that the courts have not yet considered.
The purpose of the APA is to
provide minimum procedural standards that federal administrative agencies must
follow. It distinguishes between two major forms of administrative functions:
agency rulemaking and agency adjudication. Administrative rulemaking is
analogous to the legislative acts, while an administrative adjudication is
analogous to a judicial decision. This distinction contained in the APA has
long been the subject of scholarly debate. Some argue that such a dichotomy is
unnecessarily rigid and that it might not always allow for the most appropriate
procedures for a particular agency. Supporters of the distinction between
rulemaking and adjudication contained in the APA note that this distinction
best represents the basic functions of administrative agencies.
The APA defines and governs only
those types of adjudications that are required by statute to be conducted
"on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing." If an agency
is required to conduct such a formal adjudication under the APA, it must engage
in a proceeding resembling a trial. However, if the agency is not required to
conduct such a hearing, the APA remains silent. Accordingly, an agency may
adopt its own procedure for an informal adjudication, so long as the agency
otherwise does not violate the U.S. Constitution or other law.
I contend that the
Administrative Procedures Act is unconstitutional. It violates Article One, Section One, and our
constitutional concept of separation of powers.
But as we’ve seen, the progressives only need a compliant judge to implement
their vision of the United States even if it’s against the will of the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment