Rights & Constitution trampled again

Bill of Attainder

Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."

"The Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply - trial by legislature." U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).

"These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment." William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.

"Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community." James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788.

Supreme Court cases construing the Bill of Attainder clause include:

• Ex Parte Garland, 4 Wallace 333 (1866).
• Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wallace 277 (1866).
• U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437 (1965).
• Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S.425 (1977).
• Selective Service Administration v. Minnesota PIRG, 468 U.S. 841 (1984).

(Sorry but the underlined text above is not clickable)

I thought I'd lead off with the above definition since, I'm sure, it's unfamiliar territory for the majority of you. [the education and my opinions are both FREE!] The question you may be asking is "What does this mean and why should I care?" Both are valid questions and I'll attempt to answer them for you.

What does this mean? Basically the Founding Fathers had the insight to know that power tends to corrupt people, especially those lacking in character and morals. Corrupt people in positions of power tend to abuse that power to satisfy their own agenda rather than do what is their constitutional duty. As the bold print in the heading clearly states: "a bill of attainder is any legislative act which singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial."

To clarify... let's say that you work for a large corporation. In your employment contract there is a clause defining a performance bonus. This is to be paid when your performance in your position exceeds the goals established elsewhere in your employment contract or by verbal directive from the person you report to.

Now lets pretend that your job last year was to generate 100 million in new business. (your stated objective) Let's also pretend that you busted your buns and managed to land 200 million in new business! (Way to GO!!) Your contract specifies that you get a 5% bonus for new contracts which exceed your objective. Based upon the 100 million in new business which is over your goal of 100 million.... you're eligible to receive a bonus of 5 million dollars.

You are, of course, already obligated to pay the top marginal rate on this additional income. As of 2009 that is 35%. That means the Federal Government (which did nothing to earn it) is going to demand $1,750,000 from you for your hard work. This leaves you with $3,250,000. Still... not a bad deal all things considered.

NOW let's assume that some member of Congress doesn't think that it's "fair" that you get so much money for your hard work. He's "outraged" and calls the bonus you are getting "theft" from the working class who have a "right" to your money. So... he proposes legislation to put an additional 90% tax on your bonus check to punish you for doing such a good job and being successful. So... the IRS shows up at your door and demands you turn over to them $2,925,000 in additional taxes! Congratulations! Out of your $5,000,000 bonus check you get to keep $325,000.

What has happened is that the congress person has enacted a "Bill of Attainder" which unconstitutionally singled YOU out for special taxation. You are being punished for your success without due process or a trial. Things like this are why it is important to know something about the Constitution. The Founding Fathers wrote it for a variety of reasons. It's not like they were all tossing back beers at George Washington's place and Jefferson spouts off... "Hey guys... I've got an idea.... Let's write a Constitution! That ought to be fun!"

These men had vision and foresight which still amazes to this day. They managed to think of all the ways that government could get out of hand... that people with power might abuse it... and put down in writing exactly what the roll of government was to be. What the federal government was mandated to do and what it did not have a charter to do. These defined limitations were enumerated to protect us from the power of an over reaching government and preserve our rights and freedoms. Sadly the Founding Fathers would not even recognize what the government they created has become today.

Back on message.... "What does this mean to you?" It should be clear that the example above is a parallel to the AIG incident. Congress passing a punitive additional tax on a very specific and narrowly defined group of people. "Trial by legislation and punishment enacted without due process." Just the intimidation of that possibility caused many of the AIG people to reject or return money that they were contractually due to receive. Further intimidating actions by the attorney general of the State of New York and members of ACORN have not only been illegal but bordering on terrorism.

To you it means that if the federal... or any level of government can blatantly disregard the Constitution and run roughshod over the rights of a select few people whom they want to single out... then they can do the exact same thing to YOU, if they so desire. Either the Constitution applies to all people equally or it's not worth the parchment it's written on. Worse is the fact that people... our elected representatives... who have taken an oath to protect and defend that same Constitution... seem to think that it can be invoked or ignored as they see fit. This is the true picture of power corrupting people to the point where they think themselves above the law.


As I have said in the past, elections have consequences. The American people were sold a bill of goods by the main stream media and a significant number of folks bought it hook, line and sinker. Obama said what ever he had to say to get elected and the media promoted him all the way. Hundreds of promises were made to the American people by the candidate. If you've been taking notes those "promises" are systematically being broken.

The latest to go? The promised "tax cuts for the middle class" which were going to amount to a whopping $13 a week for a married couple and $7 a week for a single person. Yes... our caring legislators simply cannot figure out any way of keeping that promise to the American people. I'd suggest they cut the pork and cancel plans to socialize the health care system... but things like that just can't be eliminated. Money for big government cannot be reduced. Money we have to live on cannot be left alone. Big government can never be expected to do with less while we are always expected to surrender our pay to government and do with less.

The good news? There isn't any right now. But... for now anyway... there is another election coming and then we have a chance to correct the problem of runaway liberalism. I still fear that these power mad liberals will figure out a way to suspend elections for reasons of "national interest" or "national security" and we'll find ourselves living under something close to marshal law until the uprising which removes them from office.

Join the TEA Party! (Taxed Enough Already) April 15th in a city near you! For more information go to: www.AmericanSolutions.com