Quote:
Originally Posted by Trump1
An interesting letter written to Representatives Richard Hudson, Justin Amash, and Trey Gowdy regarding constitutional theory and HR 38.
|
In that letter, they write:
Quote:
Congress has other powers that would be more appropriate. The Full Faith and Credit Clause empowers Congress to “prescribe * * * the Effect” of state acts, records, or judicial proceedings in other states. U.S. Const. art. IV, § 1. For instance, the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act requires certain state child support laws to be given their full effect in every other state. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738B(h). Similarly, the Parental Kidnaping Prevention Act requires every state to recognize certain child custody judgments from other states, and it forbids them from exercising their ordinary jurisdiction over such disputes. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738A.
Congress has used this power only rarely, but soon after the Founding it often debated doing so.
|
So rather than use the well-understood (though overly powerful, as the letter outlines) interstate commerce power, the authors of the bill suggest that instead the bill should be based on a Constitutional principle that has
hardly ever been used???
If it's hardly ever been used, then it means it is not legally well-defined, which means the courts will have a field day "interpreting" it as they wish.
Nope, that's not a recipe for disaster at all ...