words certainly may be taken to mean that advocates of the Constitution were wiser men, men of a higher type of mind, than the "narrower" men who opposed it. In a strict sense, of course, straight-thinking may be interpreted as thinking logically. In that case no praise or partiality is necessarily involved. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The enumerated powers also called expressed powersexplicit powers what are the dimensions of a standard wooden pallet what does strict interpretation of the constitution mean powers of the United States Congress are the powers granted to the federal government of the United States.
In summary, Congress may exercise the powers that the Constitution grants it, subject to the individual rights listed in the Bill of Rights. Moreover, the Constitution expresses various other limitations on Congress, such as the how to play golf at augusta expressed by the Tenth Amendment : "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to tthe States respectively, or to the people.
Historically, Congress and the Supreme Court have broadly interpreted the enumerated powers, especially wha deriving many implied powers from them. To borrow on the credit of the United States. To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among what is a switch in a network several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalizationand uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States facebook emoticons and what they mean. To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States.
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads. To promote the Progress of Science and useful Stirct, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right eoes their respective Writings and Discoveries. To provide and maintain a Navy. To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces. To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, constjtution Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.
To how many workhouses were there in victorian times exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District not exceeding ten Miles square as may, by Cession of particular States, and the intefpretation of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United Statesand to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased kf the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, MeznArsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And.
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular Interoretation.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from what is the met all transitions challenge source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon xonstitution, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.
Additionally, a number of amendments include a Congressional power of enforcement in which the language " The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation " is used with slight variations, granting to Congress the power to enforce the following amendments:.
There are differences of opinion on whether current interpretation of enumerated powers as exercised by Congress is constitutionally sound. One school of thought is called strict constructionism. Strict constructionists refer to a statement on the enumerated powers by Chief Justice Marshall in the case McCulloch v.
Maryland : . This government is acknowledged by all, to be one of enumerated powers. The principle, that it can exercise only the powers granted to it, would seem too apparent, to have required to be enforced by all those arguments, which its enlightened friends, while it was depending before the people, found it necessary to urge; that principle is now universally admitted.
Another school interretation thought is referred to as loose construction. They often refer to different comments by Justice Marshall from the same case:. We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the How to ship perishables overnight are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended. But we think the sound construction of the Constitution must allow to the national legislature that discretion with respect to the means by which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it in the ghe most beneficial to the people.
Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional.
Interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause has been controversial, especially during the early years of the republic. Strict constructionists interpret the clause to mean that Congress may make a law only if the inability to do so would cripple its ability to apply one of its enumerated powers.
Loose constructionistson the other hand, believe it is largely up to Congress and not the courts to determine what means are "necessary and proper" in executing one of its enumerated powers. It is often known as the "elastic clause" because of the great amount of leeway in interpretation it allows; depending on the interpretation, it can be "stretched" to expand the powers of Congress, or allowed to "contract", limiting Congress.
In practical usage, the clause has been paired with the Commerce Clause in particular to provide the constitutional basis for a wide variety of federal laws. The defining example of the Necessary and Proper Clause in U.
Maryland in The United States Constitution says nothing eoes establishing a national bank. The U. In the federal government opened a national bank in BaltimoreMaryland. In an effort to tax the bank out of business, the government of Maryland imposed a tax on the federal bank. James William McCulloch, a cashier at the bank, refused to pay the tax. Eventually the case was heard before the U. Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Marshall held that the power of establishing a national bank could be implied from the U.
Marshall ruled that no state could use its taxing power to tax an arm of the national government. The case of United States v. Lopez  in held unconstitutional what does strict interpretation of the constitution mean Gun Free School Zone Act because it exceeded the power of Congress to "regulate commerce Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote, "We start with first principles.
The Constitution creates a Federal Government of enumerated powers. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius the Supreme Court wgat that the Commerce Clause did not give Congress the authority to require individuals to purchase health insurance.
However, since the court ruled that Congress's taxing authority was sufficient to enact the mandate, some constitutional lawyers have argued that the commerce clause discussion should be treated as judicial dictum. The Enumerated Powers Act  is a proposed law that would require all bills introduced in the U.
Congress to include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which each bill is being enacted. From the th Congress to the th CongressU. Congressman John Shadegg introduced the Enumerated Powers Act, although it has not been passed into law. At the beginning of the th Congressthe House of Representatives incorporated stdict substantive requirement of the Enumerated Powers How to lost weight fast into the House rules.
The Enumerated Powers Act is supported by leaders of the U. Tea Party movement. National Tea Party leader Michael Johns has said that progressives often "see the Constitution as an impediment to their statist agenda. In almost all cases, though, there is very little thought or dialogue given to what should be the first and foremost question asked with every legislative or administrative governmental action: Is this initiative empowered to our federal government by the document's seven articles and 27 amendments?
In many cases, the answer is no. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Redirected from Enumerated powers. Parts of this article those related to documentation need to be updated.
Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. Constituion Archived from the original on Retrieved Maryland17 US S. American government and politics today: the essentials.
ISBN Constitution of the United States. Convention to propose amendments State ratifying conventions. Namespaces Article Talk. Views Read Edit View history. Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file.
Download as PDF Printable version. Deutsch Edit links. Ratified Bill of Rights 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 GND : MA :
Fighting Words and Other Threats to the Peace. In Chaplinsky dattiktok.com Hampshire, the Court unanimously sustained a conviction under a statute proscribing “any offensive, derisive or annoying word” addressed to any person in a public place under the state court’s interpretation of the statute as being limited to “fighting words”—i.e., to words that “have a direct tendency to. Feb 08, · The strict monist interpretation is influentially represented in the first two volumes of W. K. C. Guthrie’s A History of Greek Philosophy, where it is accorded a critical role in the development of early Greek natural philosophy from the purported material monism of the early Milesians to the pluralist physical theories of Empedocles. Blake clearly argues that the constitution bars the legislature from penalizing her conduct without requiring the State to prove she had a guilty mind. Pet’r’s Suppl. Br. at 18 (“[T]he legislature exceeds its power by creating a strict liability offense that lacks a public welfare rationale, has draconian consequences, and.
Parmenides of Elea, active in the earlier part of the 5th c. His philosophical stance has typically been understood as at once extremely paradoxical and yet crucial for the broader development of Greek natural philosophy and metaphysics. The difficulties involved in the interpretation of his poem have resulted in disagreement about many fundamental questions concerning his philosophical views, such as: whether he actually was a monist and, if so, what kind of monist he was; whether his system reflects a critical attitude toward earlier thinkers such as the Milesians, Pythagoreans, and Heraclitus, or whether he was motivated simply by more strictly logical concerns, such as the paradox of negative existentials that Bertrand Russell detected at the heart of his thought; whether he considered the world of our everyday awareness, with its vast population of entities changing and affecting one another in all manner of ways, to be simply an illusion, and thus whether the lengthy cosmological portion of his poem represented a genuine attempt to understand this world at all.
It concludes by suggesting that understanding his thought and his place in the development of early Greek philosophy requires taking due account of the fundamental modal distinctions that he was the first to articulate and explore with any precision. He would thus appear to have been active during the early to mid-fifth century BCE. The ancient historiographic tradition naturally associates Parmenides with thinkers such as Xenophanes and the Pythagoreans active in Magna Graecia, the Greek-speaking regions of southern Italy, whom he may well have encountered.
A 1st c. According to Diogenes Laertius, Parmenides composed only a single work D. This was a metaphysical and cosmological poem in the traditional epic medium of hexameter verse. That any portion of his poem survives is due entirely to the fact that later ancient authors, beginning with Plato, for one reason or another felt the need to quote some portion of it in the course of their own writings.
Sextus Empiricus quotes thirty of the thirty-two verses of fragment 1 the opening Proem of the poem , though apparently from some sort of Hellenistic digest rather than from an actual manuscript copy, for his quotation of fr. The Alexandrian Neoplatonist Simplicius 6th c. He introduces his lengthy quotation of fr. We are much less well informed about the cosmology Parmenides expounded in the latter part of the poem and so must supplement the primary evidence of the fragments with testimonia , that is, with various reports or paraphrases of his theories that we also find in later authors.
A more comprehensive collection of testimonia , with English translations, is to be found in Coxon , 99— Many of these testimonia are presented and translated together with the verbatim fragments in the D section of Laks and Most Certainly the partial and imperfect preservation of his poem is one factor that complicates understanding of his thought.
The maidens gently persuade Justice, guardian of these gates, to open them so that Parmenides himself may pass through to the abode within. Parmenides thus describes how the goddess who dwells there welcomed him upon his arrival:. In the proem, then, Parmenides casts himself in the role of an initiate into the kind of mysteries that were during his day part of the religious milieu of Magna Graecia. The goddess Night serves as counselor to Zeus in some of the major Orphic cosmologies, including the Derveni cosmology col.
In the closely related Orphic Rhapsodies , Night instructs Zeus on how to preserve the unity produced by his absorption of all things into himself as he sets about initiating a new cosmogonic phase. Immediately after welcoming Parmenides to her abode, the goddess describes as follows the content of the revelation he is about to receive:. She then follows this first phase of her revelation with what in the originally complete poem was a much longer account of the principles, origins, and operation of the cosmos and its constituents, from the heavens and the sun, moon, and stars right down to the earth and its population of living creatures, including humans themselves.
The second way of inquiry is here set aside virtually as soon as it is introduced. The goddess goes on to refer back to the first way of inquiry and then speaks of another way as characteristic of mortal inquiry:. Here the goddess again articulates the division of her revelation into the two major phases first announced at the end of fragment 1.
Some have thought the cosmology proceeds along the second way of inquiry introduced at fr. She in fact appears to be indicating that her harsh criticism of the inapprehension of ordinary humans, resulting from their exclusive reliance on the senses, has been designed to keep Parmenides firmly planted on the first way of inquiry.
These now include the programmatic description here in fr. The arguments here proceed methodically in accordance with the program announced at fr.
The goddess begins by arguing, in fr. Continuing on, in fr. Finally, at fr. The direct evidence provided by the last lines of fragment 8 50—64 and by the other fragments plausibly assigned to this portion of the poem frs. Since a number of these fragments are programmatic, we still have a good idea of some of the major subjects it treated. Witness the programmatic remarks of fragments 10 and A few fragments, including one known only via Latin translation, show that Parmenides also dealt with the physiology of reproduction frs.
Fortunately, the sketchy picture of the cosmology furnished by the fragments is significantly improved by the testimonia. The impression given by the fragments of the range of subjects is confirmed by both Simplicius, who comments after quoting fr. The ancient testimonia tend to confirm that Parmenides sought to explain an incredibly wide range of natural phenomena, including especially the origins and specific behaviors of both the heavenly bodies and the terrestrial population.
While Parmenides is generally recognized as having played a major role in the development of ancient Greek natural philosophy and metaphysics, fundamental disagreement persists about the upshot of his philosophy and thus about the precise nature of his influence. Sections 3. These sections do not purport to present a comprehensive taxonomy of modern interpretations, nor do they make any attempt to reference all the representatives and variants of the principal types of interpretation here described.
They are not meant to be a history of modern Parmenides interpretation, as worthy and fascinating a topic as that is. Since some advocates of the interpretations outlined in sections 3. After doing so in section 3. A successful interpretation should attend to the fr. To this end, it should avoid attributing to Parmenides views that are patently anachronistic or, worse, views that cannot be coherently asserted or maintained.
On this view, Parmenides considers the world of our ordinary experience non-existent and our normal beliefs in the existence of change, plurality, and even, it seems, our own selves to be entirely deceptive. Although less common than it once was, this type of view still has its adherents and is probably familiar to many who have only a superficial acquaintance with Parmenides.
The strict monist interpretation is influentially represented in the first two volumes of W. Finding reason and sensation to yield wildly contradictory views of reality, Parmenides presumed reason must be preferred and sensory evidence thereby rejected as altogether deceptive. It is thus illegitimate to suppose that everything came into being out of one thing Guthrie , 86—7.
In addition to thus criticizing the theoretical viability of the monistic material principles of the early Milesian cosmologists, Parmenides also is supposed to have criticized the Milesian union of the material and moving cause in their principles by arguing that motion and change are impossible and inadmissible conceptions Guthrie , 5—6, Parmenides directs us to judge reality by reason and not to trust the senses.
Reason, as deployed in the intricate, multi-staged deduction of fragment 8, reveals what attributes whatever is must possess: whatever is must be ungenerated and imperishable; one, continuous and indivisible; and motionless and altogether unchanging, such that past and future are meaningless for it.
There is the same type of tension in the outmoded proposals that Parmenides was targeting certain supposedly Pythagorean doctrines a view developed in Raven and ensconced in Kirk and Raven Here the watershed event was the publication of G.
The arguments of fragment 8, on this view, are then understood as showing that what can be thought and talked about is, surprisingly, without variation in time and space, that is, absolutely one and unchanging. While abandoning the idea that Parmenidean monism was a specific reaction to the theories of any of his predecessors, these two works continue to depict his impact on later Presocratic systems as decisive. On their Owenian line, the story becomes that the arguments of Parmenides and his Eleatic successors were meant to be generally destructive of all previous cosmological theorizing, in so far as they purported to show that the existence of change, time, and plurality cannot be naively presumed.
Brown , Untersteiner While this proposal has had fewer adherents among other interpreters favoring the Russell-Owen line, it has been taken up by certain advocates of the next type of interpretation.
One influential alternative to interpretations of Parmenides as a strict monist, certainly among scholars working in America, has been that developed by Alexander Mourelatos in his monograph, The Route of Parmenides.
As such, it is not an account of what there is namely, one thing, the only one that exists but, rather, of whatever is in the manner required to be an ontologically fundamental entity—a thing that is F , for some F , in an essential way. Thus Nehamas has more recently written:.
To be a genuine entity, a thing must be a predicational unity, with a single account of what it is; but it need not be the case that there exists only one such thing. Rather, the thing itself must be a unified whole. If it is, say, F , it must be all, only, and completely F. Mourelatos, Nehamas, and Curd all take Parmenides to be concerned with specifying in an abstract way what it is to be the nature or essence of a thing, rather than simply with specifying what there in fact is, as he is presumed to be doing on both the logical-dialectical and the more traditional strict monist readings.
Advocates of the meta-principle reading here face a dilemma. The cosmological principles light and night do not in fact conform to those strictures. Not only is this an unstable interpretive position, it imputes confusion to Parmenides rather than acknowledge its own difficulties.
Long for a more detailed development of this interpretive line. Unfortunately, this notion has no real ancient authority. But Aristotle mentions Parmenides nowhere in the passage, and his complaint is in fact broadly directed against all the early Greek philosophers whose views he has been surveying previously in the book.
He complains that they naively adopted the view that no fundamental entity or substance comes to be or perishes, the result being that they are unable to account for, because they disavow, substantial change, which is the very phenomenon Aristotle is most interested in explaining.
In the complex treatment of Parmenides in Physics 1. According to Aristotle, Melissus held that everything is a single, i. This is only a superficial difference, given how at Physics 1. Despite the assimilation of Melissus and Parmenides under the rubric inherited from Gorgias, Aristotle recognized that grouping the two figures together under this convenient label obscured fundamental differences in their positions.
Among its species are strict monism or the position that just one thing exists. This is the position Melissus advocated, one which no serious metaphysician should want to adopt. More familiar species include both numerical and generic substance monism, according to which, respectively, there is a single substance or a single kind of substance.
Aristotle attributes to both Parmenides and Plato the recognition that knowledge requires as its objects certain natures or entities not susceptible to change—to Parmenides in De Caelo 3.
This would be a rash conclusion, however, for Plato consistently represents Parmenides as a monist in later dialogues see, e. There the One is shown to have a number of properties that reflect those Parmenides himself attributed to Being in the course of fr. In the Second Deduction, all these properties prove to belong to the One in virtue of its own nature and in relation to itself.
Alexander of Aphrodisias quotes him as having written the following of Parmenides in the first book of his On the Natural Philosophers :. The passage on the whole suggests that, like Plato and Aristotle, Theophrastus understood Parmenides as furnishing dual accounts of the universe, first in its intelligible and then in its phenomenal aspects.
Both Plato and Aristotle understood Parmenides as perhaps the first to have developed the idea that apprehension of what is unchanging is of a different order epistemologically than apprehension of things subject to change.
More fundamentally, Plato and Aristotle both came to understand Parmenides as a type of generous monist whose conception of what is belongs more to theology or first philosophy than to natural science. None of these broad points, in other words, involves Plato or Aristotle viewing Parmenides through the distorting lens of their own concepetual apparatus. Numerous interpreters have variously resisted the idea that Parmenides meant to deny the very existence of the world we experience.
They have consequently advocated some more robust status for the cosmological portion of his poem. See, e. See also the proposal at Kahn , and n.