View source for A Layman's* Refutation of the Tenther Movement

<!-- you can have any number of categories here -->
[[Category:DJ The Young Grasshopper]]
[[Category:Tenther movement]]
<!-- 1 URL must be followed by >= 0 Other URL and Old URL and 1 End URL.-->
{{URL | url = https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2009/10/16/794109/-}}
<!-- {{Other URL | url = }} -->
<!-- {{Old URL | url = }} -->
{{End URL}}
{{DES | des = "... the Supreme Court had already ruled that the Constitution grants the federal government implied powers.  In the 1819 Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland, the court ruled that the "Necessary and Proper Clause" of the Constitution (Section 8, Clause 18) gave Congress powers not specifically given in the US Constitution." | show=}}
<!-- insert wiki page text here -->
<!-- DPL has problems with categories that have a single quote in them.  Use these explicit workarounds. -->
<!-- otherwise, we would use {{Links}} and {{Quotes}}  -->
{{List|title=A Layman's* Refutation of the Tenther Movement|links=true}}
{{Quotations|title=A Layman's* Refutation of the Tenther Movement|quotes=true}}

{{Text |
If you've ever spent any time debating right-wingers on the issue of health care (or Social Security, Medicare, or-in my case-the Air Force), you will likely come across a "tenther".  This post is to provide a logical refutation of the tenther movement philosophies using previous court cases interpreting the US Constitution.

The tenther movement, according to Wikipedia, is:

The Tenther movement is a pejorative term used to describe a political ideology and a social movement in the United States which espouses that many actions of the United States government are unconstitutional.  Adherents invoke the concept that the states share sovereignty with the federal government and with the people by citing the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution as the basis for their legal and ideological beliefs:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Tenthers believe all actions and authority not specifically enumerated in the United States Constitution lie with states and citizens.  They argue for a return of sovereignty to states and individuals.  Opponents draw intellectual parallels between the modern tenthers and the nineteenth century states' rights secessionists and the movement to resist Civil Rights era legal advances.
Tenthers have been gaining momentum in recent years, going from being little more than right-wing conspiracy nutbars on the fringe of society to being embraced by prominent national politicians such as Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann.

Despite the tenther movement gaining traction, the lack of knowledge provided to counter their claims on the left has been frightening.  We, the hundreds of thousands strong army of super-bloggers, haven't provided anything to show why the claims of the tenthers are b.s., aside from the typical ad hominem attacks of them being "nuts".  When doing a google search on the word "tenther", I found many things showing insults towards the tenther movement, but very little in the way of providing strong, factual information to counter their argument that anything not specifically granted by the US Constitution is illegal for the federal government to conduct (i.e., Medicare).

Obviously Medicare, Social Security, and the Air Force (yes, I've had tenthers tell me the Air Force is unconstitutional) are legal because we've had them for decades without being struck down by the Supreme Court.  So why is this?

Well first of all, the Supreme Court had already ruled that the Constitution grants the federal government implied powers.  In the 1819 Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland, the court ruled that the "Necessary and Proper Clause" of the Constitution (Section 8, Clause 18) gave Congress powers not specifically given in the US Constitution.

There are many other court cases that have given the federal government power to regulate under the Constitution.  For some more, click the above link.  

So what rights are granted under the Tenth Amendment?  Well, they're given the right to exist and form their own laws.  From United States v. Darby:

The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers.....
So next time, when you hear a tenther jackass pretending that they know something about the Constitution, feel free to not just call them stupid, but to tell them why they're stupid.

*I am not a lawyer, and so am not qualified to give legal opinions of my own.  Everything cited is from previous court cases decided by real, honest-to-blog judges and lawyers.
}}