A Constitutional Answer

...And A Furriner Shalt Lead Them

Published on December 23, 2005 By kingbee In Politics

"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 State."

as rarely as i agree with leauki about anything, his reasoning and conclusion in response to this question was correct in contrast to the rebuttal offered by two 'america love it (even if you don't have a clue about it) or leave it' patronizing patriots talking nonsense thru their uncle sam hats.

it would be amusing if it weren't so sad.

Comments

Leauki

on Dec 23, 2005

So I take it that since the constitution speaks of territory and other property belonging to the United States, it was indeed a given that souvreignty meant that the government can own land?

Leauki

on Dec 23, 2005

And may I add that we Europeans can read American documents and need no translation.

(We speak the same language too, some of us*; particularly those of us who live on the British isles, where "England" is and "English" comes from.)

((*or should that be "some of we"?))

Gene Nash

on Dec 23, 2005

~OFF TOPIC~

It looks like someone has appropriated your handle for spamming purposes: http://kingbee.joeuser.com/

(I'd comment on topic, but your article pretty much said it all.

)

drmiler

on Dec 23, 2005

if the question is: "does the constitution provide for the federal government to own and administer the physical real estate of which these united states are comprised?'", the answer is very clearly spelled out in the second paragraph of article vi, section 3:

"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 State."

And in my opinion you'd be just as wrong as leauki about it. First off I never said "anything" about administering property. My question was and still is where does it say that the feds can "OWN" property? No where in your quote does it say they can own property. Your quote very specifically says: dispose of and make all "needful" rules and regulations. None of this even begins to come close to the meaning of owning property.

citahellion

on Dec 23, 2005

DRMiler, it does say very clearly "Property belonging to the United States", which obviously carries the implication that the U.S. government owns the land.

Further, you have to consider the overall quote in the legalese context. To "dispose of" property does not mean that they are going to throw it away, for example. Rather, they can determine the disposition of property. That may include granting it to settlers, selling it to developers, leasing it to logging companies, or holding on to it for an indeterminate period of time; just to cite a few possible examples.

drmiler

on Dec 23, 2005

DRMiler, it does say very clearly "Property belonging to the United States", which obviously carries the implication that the U.S. government owns the land.

There is a second way to look at it. Any piece of land that is "part" of the United States (such as the state of Texas) "belongs" to the US. This would "not" infer ownership of such land just that it's "part" of the whole. Tell a Texan that the US government owns Texas and sit back and watch the fireworks.

kingbee

on Dec 24, 2005

It looks like someone has appropriated your handle for spamming purposes:

wtf is up with that?

can it really be as easily done as it appears? and why did they pick on me dammit?

kingbee

on Dec 24, 2005

So I take it that since the constitution speaks of territory and other property belonging to the United States, it was indeed a given that souvreignty meant that the government can own land?

yup.

kingbee

on Dec 24, 2005

There is a second way to look at it.

there's prolly a dozen ways to look at it. only one applies.

This would "not" infer ownership of such land just that it's "part" of the whole

it wouldn't infer anything because it's impossible for a statement to derive meaning from itself. as citahellion pointed out, it very certainly does imply ownership.

Tell a Texan that the US government owns Texas and sit back and watch the fireworks.

nothin the residents of baja oklahoma might do would come close to what would happen if you told descendants of the alta oklahoma land rush beneficiaries the government didn't own the land it gave em.

drmiler

on Dec 24, 2005

This would "not" infer ownership of such land just that it's "part" of the whole

it wouldn't infer anything because it's impossible for a statement to derive meaning from itself. as citahellion pointed out, it very certainly does imply ownership.

If you are going to quote me fine. But quote the "entire" section so other people know what I was talking about.

Any piece of land that is "part" of the United States (such as the state of Texas) "belongs" to the US. This would "not" infer ownership of such land just that it's "part" of the whole

And just an fyi....if you can't understand what I was talking about then you might have problem. And no, the statement citahellion used does NOT imply ownership! However ownership could be "inferred" from the statement.

kingbee

on Dec 24, 2005

the statement citahellion used does NOT imply ownership! However ownership could be "inferred" from the statement.

if it isn't implied, it can't be inferred.

And just an fyi....if you can't understand what I was talking about then you might have problem

i'm truly regretful about not communicating with you in whatever language you're more comfortably fluent than english.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!