For legislators to honor the real contract with Americans that is the Constitution, they must repeal their tyrannical burden [4] on Americans: existing unconstitutional statutes [5].

Although presidents shall from time to time recommend to congress’s consideration such measures as they shall judge necessary and expedient [6], all legislative powers granted in the Constitution are vested in congresses [7].

Organizationally, routine responsibility for various existing statutes is taken by various congressional committees’ and subcommittees’ majorities [8], [9]. Also there’s the safeguard [10] that overall responsibility remains with each house’s majority, which can bypass the committees and subcommittees by directly bringing up bills for votes [11].

Procedurally, in senates the filibuster and cloture rules are unconstitutional. These rules make each majority senator’s vote count less than each minority senator’s vote. These rules also deprive vice presidents of their power to vote when the vote is equally divided, a constitutional power that mere Senate rules can’t overrule [12].

Oaths of office require each legislator to support the Constitution [13].

Together, these things mean that each congressional house’s simple majority has the power, organization, and duty to methodically examine every statute for constitutionality, and to vote to summarily repeal every statute that the members individually interpret to be unconstitutional [14].

Legislators can screen existing statutes for constitutionality using the following simple criteria [15]:

• No misleading parts.
• Only uses powers enumerated for the national government.
• No delegation of legislative power.
• No grabs of executive power.
• No grabs of judicial power.
• Not noncritical, complex, or long, and not helping make the total corpus of law incomprehensibly complex or long.

The few statutes that fail this screen but are constitutional are easy to recognize. A congress’s exceptions and regulations on national courts, for example, read like grabs of judicial power, but congresses are explicitly delegated the power to make these rules [16]; this offsets the judicial power.

Statutes that are constitutional consist entirely of rules and associated sanctions, with all tradeoffs already made [17]. After statutes that are constitutional are enacted into law, all that’s left to do is enforce the law and judge cases.

When statutes are limited in this way, powers are separated simply and fully [18].

Statutes that are constitutional don’t authorize any administrative-bureaucracy rulemaking or adjudication. Both are unconstitutional because both are tyrannical [19].

Triage and full repeal aren’t hard; living under tyranny is hard. And this tyranny can only be formally repealed by legislators.

If supporting the Constitution will mean that a committee or subcommittee must dissolve, then plainly the committee or subcommittee should never have formed and should have been dissolved long ago. To be the first members who finally did the right thing would be an honor [20].