Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

General Welfare Clause

Read a random definition: Anti-Spam Frameworks At-a-Glance: Introduction

A quick definition of General Welfare Clause:

The General Welfare Clause is a part of the United States Constitution that gives Congress the power to collect taxes and pay debts for the good of the country. This means that Congress can use the money they collect to create programs that help people, like social security. The Supreme Court has said that this clause is very important and allows Congress to do many things to make the country better.

A more thorough explanation:

The General Welfare Clause is a provision in the United States Constitution, specifically in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. This clause gives Congress the power to collect taxes and pay debts for the purpose of promoting the general welfare of the country.

The Supreme Court has interpreted this clause broadly, allowing Congress to create programs such as the social security system. This means that Congress can use tax revenue to fund programs that benefit the overall well-being of the American people.

For example, the social security system provides financial assistance to retired and disabled individuals, as well as their families. This program helps to promote the general welfare of the country by ensuring that vulnerable populations have access to basic necessities.

Another example of a program that falls under the General Welfare Clause is Medicaid. This program provides healthcare coverage to low-income individuals and families, helping to promote the overall health and well-being of the American people.

Overall, the General Welfare Clause gives Congress the power to use tax revenue to fund programs that benefit the American people as a whole, promoting the general welfare of the country.

general welfare | generation

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.