The best way to answer that is to accept the libertarian presumption of the Founders that if there was any reasonable doubt concerning whether a power had been delegated, or, equivalently, whether an individual has an immunity, or right against the affirmative action of government, the decision must always be made against the power and in favor of the immunity. The refrain should be, "quo warranto", and that should seek an unbroken logical chain of authority from the applicable constitution, either from a provision of it or a lack thereof.
The Founders were somewhat more literal-minded than lawyers today in the way they wrote constitutions and expected them to be interpreted. They never intended doctrines of "implied" or "inherent" powers to hold the sway they do today. "Implied" powers were only to administer a delegated power, not to do whatever it might take to achieve an objective that a delegated power might be used to try to accomplish.
Russell, Steve wrote:
If there is, the question is whose opinion gets the benefit of doubts?
---------------------------------------------------------------- Our efforts depend on donations from people like you. Directions for donors are at http://www.constitution.org/whatucando.htm Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 512/374-9585 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------------------
