bill endpoint documentation nit

[TeepTech]

While I'm not suggesting this as a high priority, the example Constitutional Authority Statement (following) in the bill endpoint documentation should be changed. It specifies only Article I, Section I, Clause 18, aka the ‘Necessary and Proper’ clause which is counter to guidance as substantiated below.

The Congressional Research Service document, Constitutional Authority Statement: A Quick Guide, guides against citing only the Necessary and Proper clause owing to its being inconsistent with federal court's interpretation as addressed in clause 5 in its section Considerations for Drafting a CAS as follows:

Does the CAS cite only to the Necessary and Proper Clause? To the extent that a Member wishes to cite exclusively to the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, clause 18), it may be helpful to remember that courts have understood the Necessary and Proper Clause to supplement Congress’s enumerated powers under the Constitution but have not construed the clause as an independent source of power. [emphasis mine]

[TeepTech]

I am not clear that any action has been taken to address the issue I raised relative to the CAS being inconsistent with the Rule.

[apreiter18]

The documentation was updated, @TeepTech - let me know if you have any questions. Thanks.