Online users
???: Message   

Eh-heh. As I said, "Accepting grants is a Faustian bargain."
Re: Federal funding. -- DullArmor Post Reply Top of thread Forum

Posted by: TEEBONE ®

11/19/2020, 17:44:12

Author Profile Mail author Edit
What you've described is the gambit that's in place.

The states took the bait long ago and it's now a purely political issue. The practice is, unfortunately, not unconstitutional.

They've willingly surrendered huge chunks of their 10th Amendment protection, and the SCOTUS has for the most part been complicit via the Chevron Deference doctrine, agency regulations written pursuant to statutory laws are presumptively lawful.

Congress has vested that power in said agencies by crafting laws that leave the fine print to them.

Example: Prohibition of firearms on USPS property

U.S. Code clearly states that such a prohibition does not extend to possession for lawful purposes on USPS property, yet the plain text of the statute is ignored in its application.

18 U.S. Code § 930 says:

"(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both...

"(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—...

"(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting OR OTHER LAWFUL PURPOSES." (emphasis mine)


Democrats wouldn't buy a clue if it was government subsidized.

Liberals are people who stand on their heads and insist that the world is upside-down.

Post Reply | Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page