02.06.2013 Views

WOE UNTO YOU, LAWYERS!

WOE UNTO YOU, LAWYERS!

WOE UNTO YOU, LAWYERS!

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

involved to be recounted here, that the original Constitution forbade Congress to tax<br />

citizens’ incomes.<br />

It was under the Court’s “interpretation” of what the interstate commerce<br />

clause did not mean that such New Deal laws as the National Industrial Recovery<br />

Act and the Guffey Coal Act met their death. It seems there are two principles. One<br />

is that Congress may regulate anything that affects interstate commerce directly.<br />

The other is that Congress may not regulate anything that affects interstate<br />

commerce only indirectly. Of course, there is not a word in the Constitution itself<br />

about direct or indirect effects on interstate commerce but that does not keep those<br />

effects from being a very vital consideration in Constitutional Law.<br />

Applying these principles, the Court said that working conditions in<br />

companies doing interstate business affected interstate commerce only indirectly.<br />

So it was perfectly apparent that the N.I.R.A. and the Guffey Coal Act, both of<br />

which made bold to regulate those working conditions, were downright<br />

unconstitutional. But by the time the Wagner Labor Act came along a couple of<br />

years later, working conditions in companies doing interstate business had suddenly<br />

acquired a direct effect on interstate commerce, and so a law regulating those<br />

conditions was perfectly constitutional. The relevant principles of Constitutional<br />

Law remained, of course, unchanged. It was merely that, this time, a different<br />

principle was “controlling.”<br />

There was, moreover, a second reason why the N.I.R.A. was unconstitutional<br />

– for the Court is not always content to kill a law with one shot of Constitutional<br />

principle. The second reason is especially interesting because it involves one of<br />

those chunks of Constitutional Law that is not even remotely derived from anything<br />

written in the document that most people think of as the Constitution. The Court just<br />

made this up all by itself.<br />

The basic principle that the Court made up is that Congress may not delegate<br />

or hand over any of its lawmaking power to anyone else. Now it is clear that if this<br />

principle were really followed there wouldn’t be any United States government. All<br />

the thousands of rules and regulations and orders, little laws every one of them, that<br />

are formulated day after day by every branch of the government – by the<br />

commissions, like the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal Trade<br />

Commission, by the departments, all ten of them, and by the branches and bureaus of<br />

the departments, like the Patent Office and the Coast Guard and the rest – all these<br />

rules and regulations would have to be passed by Congress itself. It is only because<br />

Congress has always delegated the largest part of its lawmaking power, after laying<br />

down the broad, general outlines of a law, that the federal government has been able<br />

to function at all.<br />

40

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!