[Doofy]

So, stumbled across this page while on my travels.

Once an emergency is declared, there is no Constitution. Senate Report 93-549 (written by Congress in 1973) states in the very first sentence:

"Since March the 9th, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency. Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and... control the lives of all American citizens"

This situation has continued absolutely uninterrupted since March 9, 1933. We have been in a state of declared national emergency for nearly 63 years* without knowing it.

* Obviously written some time ago.

So, is this real or just some fantasy dreamt up by a foil hat wearer?

[BadKosh]

Dos the same hold true about declaring war?
Does a surrender cancel the War declaration?

[Dakarʒ]

Googling March 9, 1933 comes up with some interesting results.

[Dork.]

Interesting, but I think that this is all about a misunderstanding over what the term "national emergency" means. Just because those words appear in a act of Congress doesn't mean that the constitution is null and void. One congressman may have thought that, but that doesn't mean that it was the intent of Congress as a whole to do so.

Based on the link here (I'm too lazy to click all the google links), it looks like Congress asked the President to close banks for a few days to avoid a financial crisis, which he did. If you read the full text of the bill, Congress probably only gave the President this limited authority this one time, and needed to say it was a national emergency to justify it. But the powers that were given to the President were in all likelihood limited to dealing with the bank crisis, and terminated when the crisis went away, even in Congress didn't explicitly say so.

[Moderator]

...Constitution...so Pre-9/11.

[peeb]

Yeah - this explains a lot of what's been happening lately!

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

But the powers that were given to the President were in all likelihood limited to dealing with the bank crisis, and terminated when the crisis went away, even in Congress didn't explicitly say so.

In all likelihood, yes. However, it's probably not a bad question to ask and verify rather than assume.

"So, ummm, all those powers you gave the President 63 years ago ... did you ever, like, you know, take them back, or anything?"