The US Constitution doesn’t provide a right to clean drinking water or accurate information from public officials, a divided federal appeals court ruled.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Idk man, prompting the general welfare of Americans would probably include clean water. Just my opinion though.
The Constitution sometimes says the purpose of laws. You’ve shown the preamble. Another one I’m familiar with is in the Copyright Clause, where it says the purpose is to promote the progress of useful science and arts. Another is the “well-regulated militia” clause of the 2nd Amendment.
I’m not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell, Constitutional scholars today don’t think those parts have much, if any, legal weight at all. It’s like, the other parts are the important things, and the “why” is just to give context.
I think this is exactly backwards. Whenever the Constitution says “why”, that’s the most important part. Those parts set a standard by which the laws can each be tested, and inserts a lot of objectivity.
I mean, “promote the general welfare” is almost exactly a description of utilitarianism. If a law makes people generally worse off, then it should be unconstitutional on that basis alone.
If I was rewriting the Constitution, rather than specific laws, it would consist almost entirely of the goals of the government (such as having a democracy that reflects the will of citizens), and the rest of the Constitution would mostly list the legal rights of citizens. Laws would have to say in what measurable way they’re getting closer to the goals, and they’d become invalid if they didn’t live up to the measure. Any laws that moved us farther from our ideals would not be allowed.
"The Preamble
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Idk man, prompting the general welfare of Americans would probably include clean water. Just my opinion though.
You forgot the part where it only applies to white cis male land owners.
The Constitution sometimes says the purpose of laws. You’ve shown the preamble. Another one I’m familiar with is in the Copyright Clause, where it says the purpose is to promote the progress of useful science and arts. Another is the “well-regulated militia” clause of the 2nd Amendment.
I’m not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell, Constitutional scholars today don’t think those parts have much, if any, legal weight at all. It’s like, the other parts are the important things, and the “why” is just to give context.
I think this is exactly backwards. Whenever the Constitution says “why”, that’s the most important part. Those parts set a standard by which the laws can each be tested, and inserts a lot of objectivity.
I mean, “promote the general welfare” is almost exactly a description of utilitarianism. If a law makes people generally worse off, then it should be unconstitutional on that basis alone.
If I was rewriting the Constitution, rather than specific laws, it would consist almost entirely of the goals of the government (such as having a democracy that reflects the will of citizens), and the rest of the Constitution would mostly list the legal rights of citizens. Laws would have to say in what measurable way they’re getting closer to the goals, and they’d become invalid if they didn’t live up to the measure. Any laws that moved us farther from our ideals would not be allowed.
Welfare is socialism.
The Preamble is not substantive. It dies not convey rights or restrict powers. It is an introductory statement, not a controlling section.
That’s explaining the purpose of the document. It’s not any of its provisions.
I mean… if they could read, they’d be very upset