Enumerated powers were included by the framers of our Constitution for the sole purpose of limiting government overreach and providing a check and balance for the Executive, Judiciary, and Legislative branches.
James Madison declared in the 45th Federalist essay that: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined."
The Supreme Court will soon be deciding the case of Cummings vs. Premier Rehab Keller, which after all the legal context is watered down, becomes a legal case for the right to sue entities based on emotional distress -- otherwise known as feelings.
What should be of concern to all of us is the potential legal precedent this may set for future rulings, and the threat to religious liberties.
According to an article in The Daily Signal, the Supreme Court has previously never articulated whether compensatory damages include emotional distress.
While this case has flown largely under the radar, it will have colossal implications for the ongoing legal battle to protect religious freedom, especially as it intersects with modern interpretations of civil rights law and governmental anti-discrimination provisions.
[...]
The ramifications of the Supreme Court’s decision in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller will likely extend far beyond disability law. Emotional distress is almost entirely subjective and could be used as a pretext to sue people and businesses under anti-discrimination law where the only alleged discriminatory conduct involved is honoring one’s religious beliefs.
If Premier Rehab is forced to pay emotional distress damages to Cummings, what of the medical practitioners who refuse to perform mastectomies on transgender patients or bakeries that decline to make custom cakes for same-sex couples?
Do you see the potential damage that await small business owners?
In reading this article by The Daily Signal, I began to wonder how much of all this legal wrangling was brought into the judiciary establishment by its precursor of politically correct speech?
While teaching at a well- known university in the 1990's, I was given the option of retaining my position as an Associate Lecturer by eliminating the use of the word's men, women, boys, or girls, because they were not gender neutral.
Now, thanks to the exploitation of the general welfare clause and conscious ignoring of enumerated powers, woke ideologies are becoming the status quo in federal proceedings -- not just on liberal college campuses.
Folks, the writing is on the wall of our Republic's destination. A bloated and larger government making our decisions for us by new legal precedents and by the re-framing of the intended definitions of enumerated powers and general welfare.
Politically correct speech has opened Pandora's Box of not hurting other people's feelings, so that they can sue us if we do!
Since when is government legally responsible for the way I feel? Isn't that a private issue that provides the fertile ground for personal growth?
Where would this type of legal wrangling ever end? Feelings are a personal experience of perception, and too subjective to be considered as a legal basis... "You hurt my feelings for not liking me, I'm going to sue you"!
It seems the government now wants to do our growing up for us!
I say, "No thanks, I would rather call for a Convention of States that will write new amendments limiting your interference in our living expressions."
Be a part of the solution that is as big as the problem... Join the Convention of States by signing the petition below!
