RFRA & Federal Statutes

[RJLipkin at aol.com]

I'm not sure how "partial  repeal" factors into this discussion.  But 
pointing out that there are  obvious functions of government that the Constitution 
does not specifically  authorize without some broad notion of "inherent powers" 
only shows what perhaps  many already know, namely, that the idea of a limited 
government with enumerated  powers is largely false and perhaps shouldn't be 
taken seriously.  For me,  the dispute is settled only after we articulate the 
most plausible conceptions  of "enumerated powers," etc., and then determine 
what that conception implies  for the issues under discussion. Perhaps there's 
an array of activities  government may do without any specific provision for 
doing so. For example, and  only half seriously, the Constitution doesn't 
provide authorization for congress  persons walking into their chambers, yet it 
would of course be absurd to require  such a provision or reject the idea of a 
limited government with enumerated  powers if no provision is found. I don't 
think the question we're discussing is  silly in that way. And so, again for me 
conceptual analysis of the key concepts  is the fundamentally important 
approach.  And this time I will keep my word  about retiring from this thread.  
Thanks again. 
 
Bobby
 
Robert Justin  Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of  Law
Delaware
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20051115/3ef5050e/attachment.htm