Posted on 01/23/2013 1:09:29 PM PST by marktwain
Because the politicians in Washington, DC value money over you and your family.
I’m not directing this critique at you marktwain, but as evidenced by the picture in the OP, please consider the following.
The picture in the OP arguably misses a major point. More specifically, Constituiton-ignorant patriots unsurprisingly don’t seem to understand that the states have never delegated to Congress via the Constitution the powers to make laws for many of the issues that Congress is now making a mess out of. So it’s not that DC laws are broken, but many of those laws shouldn’t exist in the first place, Congress limited to regulating mainly the things specified in the Constitution’s Section 8 of Article I. In fact, the Founding States made the 10th Amendment to clarify that it’s uniquely up to the states to regulate most issues not addressed by Section 8.
No, they have not. But a runaway Supereme Court, especially during the FDR years, ran roughshod over the 10th Amendment by allowing Congress to claim "Interstate Commerce" on all of the laws they did pass.
Until you can get a strict Constructionist Supreme Court to overturn all of those decisions, there's not a lot you can do about it.
Unless and until states and individuals start reacting to SCOTUS' conflict of interest by ignoring rulings they make that empower the government that they're a part of.
Have you even been on a jury in a civil or criminal case? They won't let you participate if you so much as KNOW one or more of the parties, even secondary parties to the case such as the attorneys or the judge, let alone sit on a case where your BOSS is a litigant or the accused, and judges are required to recuse themselves from cases involving people they know. So obviously, any SCOTUS ruling the empowers the feds at the expense of states or individuals is suspect and should more than likely be ignored.
There’s plenty you can do, you just have to dump the notion that SCOTUS is the voice of God on matters constitutional. Which it isn’t, because that’d be like the jury consisting of your brother, a couple of cousins, some buddies, and your dog at your murder trial.
Hear, hear!!
The problem is that we're probably not going to hear Obama guard dog Fx News talking about the following historical excerpts concerning Congress's limited Commerce Clause powers in the foreseeable future.
For example, using terms like "does not extend" and "exclusively," Thomas Jefferson had clarified that Congress has no business sticking its big nose into intrastate Commerce.
“For the power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which remain exclusively (emphases added) with its own legislature; but to its external commerce only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes.” –Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson’s Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791.Next, using health laws as an example nonetheless, two justices had also officially clarified the limits of Congress's Commerce Clause powers.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress (emphasis added)." --Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824."Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description, as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state (emphases added) and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass." --Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln, 1837.
Finally, I have yet to find references to any of the above excerpts in Wickard v. Filburn where FDR's puppet justices put on their "magic glasses" to find new powers for Congress in the Commerce Clause.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.