Saturday, January 23, 2016

[Future U.S. Supreme Court Justice] James Iredell: "it would be an act which they are not authorized to pass, by the Constitution, and which the people would not obey. Every one would ask, “Who authorized the government to pass such an act? It is not warranted by the Constitution, and is barefaced usurpation.”

    “Is there any power given to Congress in matters of religion? Can they pass a single act to impair our religious liberties? If they could, it would be a just cause of alarm. If they could, sir, no man would have more horror against it than myself. Happily, no sect here is superior to another. As long as this is the case, we shall be free from those persecutions and distractions with which other countries have been torn. If any future Congress should pass an act concerning the religion of the country, it would be an act which they are not authorized to pass, by the Constitution, and which the people would not obey. Every one would ask, “Who authorized the government to pass such an act? It is not warranted by the Constitution, and is barefaced usurpation.”–[Future U.S. Supreme Court Justice] James Iredell, July 30, 1788. [Debates In The Convention Of The State Of North Carolina, On The Adoption Of The Federal Constitution. Eliot’s Debates, Vol. IV. Pgs. 191-200]

No comments: