Constitutional Minute #15   Roger Clements vs US Congress


In 2008, Roger Clements (one of the most successful power pitchers in history) was contacted by members of Congress and ordered to appear before a congressional committee on drug use in sports.

Mr. Clements foolishly complied. As a result, he was subsequently indicted on perjury, a completely unrelated charge. If he (or his attorney) had had a working knowledge of the Constitution, he would have advised Congress that he planned to ignore such a demand to appear until Congress can prove they have the lawful authority to address the subject of “drugs” or “sports”. They can’t because that authority does not exist.

The Constitution grants to Congress only limited powers to make criminal laws. Does Congress have the lawful authority to even address the subject of “sports” or “drugs” for the nation as a whole, or to make criminal laws on those subjects?  NO!!

 Thus, laws which claim to be of general application throughout the several States criminalizing acts respecting firearms, ammunition, hate crimes, environmental crimes, economic crimes, banking crimes, computer crimes, murder, kidnapping, narcotics, arson, extortion, etc. etc., etc., etc., etc., are all unconstitutional usurpations.

In Federalist No. 33, Hamilton cited Art. VI, cl.2, as showing that laws which are not pursuant to the Constitution are merely acts of usurpation and deserve to be treated as such (7th Para).

 Note: Much of the federal criminal code of today consists of “laws” which are mere usurpations and deserve to be treated as such.  They are not “laws”, because they are outside the legislative powers granted to Congress by the Constitution.

Here’s an authoritative paper on what criminal laws our federal government may lawfully and constitutionally address: