counterfeiting & separation of powers

[Mark Graber]

>>> awolf at LLAMA.LNET.WNEC.EDU 09/14/00 02:22PM >>>
        Mark, sorry to be so dense, but I do not immediately see the connection
between Justice Daniel's comment in Fox and the reason for including the
counterfeiting provision in the Constitution.  The point made earlier was
that the power of Congress to punish counterfeiting should be viewed as
"necessary and proper" to carry out the enumerated power to coin money (and
presumably to print paper money).  Art. I, Sec. 8 enumerates only three
powers relating to criminal activity: (1) counterfeiting; (2) piracies and
felonies committed on the high seas; and (3) offenses against the law of
nations (i.e., international law).  The United States Criminal Code (Title
18) is a testament to the breadth of the necessary and proper clause (and
arguably the superfluity of the counterfeiting clause).  Are you suggesting
that the express provision relating to counterfeiting would preclude the
Congress from enacting other criminal statutes relating to money (coin or
paper), if not strictly "counterfeiting"?


                                Art Wolf
                                Western New England College

I respond:

No need to apologize.  I included this mostly because I thought the very narrow reading by the Taney Court might be of historical interest.  I was not intending to support any present position.

Mark A. Graber
mgraber at gvpt.umd.edu