top of page

Implied and Implicit Powers of Congress

Mike Dragon should have followed the adage, "Don't criticize what you don't understand," regarding Ben Benassi's letter to the editor.

Mr. Dragon doesn't seem to understand that the Constitution has two kinds of power: implied and implicit.

He is correct that the Constitution does not explicitly allow Congress to establish the Department of Education, nor does it mention the departments of Commerce, Energy, Interior, Health and Human Services, etc. These departments were established under Section 8 of the Constitution: This clause gives Congress the power "to make all laws that shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all powers vested by this Constitution …." This includes the power to create departments not listed in the Constitution.

The U.S. Supreme Court case of McCulloch v MARYLAND affirmed this power to create new departments when John Marshall ruled that although the Constitution did not explicitly grant the federal government the right to open a national bank, the "Necessary and Proper Clause" did. This set the stage for the government to create departments like Education.

I understand there were protestors at justices' homes, but my research has not found any incidences of attacks on their property. As for publishing the justices' telephone numbers, I think that was uncalled for.

I find it interesting how people focus on the shortcomings or wrong actions of others while completely ignoring the actions of those they agree with. You object to the demonstrations in front of Supreme Court justices' homes but ignore the protests in front of abortion clinics, their doctors' houses, and the killing of doctors. You ignore Trump followers, thinking it's okay to call the elections department and threaten their employees and families. You ignore Moms for Liberty-sponsored attacks on school board members and their families. Publishing Supreme Court telephone numbers is far less intrusive than going after two election workers as Trump did, making their lives a living hell. It was so bad they are now suing him.

Ben Benassi's letter is right on. Moms for Liberty is an extremist group. Unlike the relatively mild agenda on its website, Moms for Liberty's social media posts, policies, and practices target teachers, school officials, and the U.S. Department of Education, advance conspiracy theories, and spread "hateful imagery and rhetoric against the LGBTQ community."

Thomas Mitchell


18 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page