Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tublecane
The government should be interested in preventing violence, fraud, coercion, and trespassing against property rights. That’s all.

State governments yes. I am certain that you are not discussing federal power to do these things ...

4 posted on 04/30/2012 2:14:28 PM PDT by frithguild (You can call me Snippy the Anti-Freeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: frithguild

“State governments yes. I am certain that you are not discussing federal power to do these things ...”

No, of course not. Unless it rises to the level of domestic insurrection, threatens the republican nature of the state governments, etc. But that would require an awful lot of violence. Also, violence, physical obstruction, etc. could threaten interstate commerce, and as such fall under the feds’ regulatory powers. But I have a very high standard for when that’s happening, and adopt a much, much stricter construction of that clause than SCOTUS, giving the benefit of the doubt always to the feds having no power.

I wouldn’t include, for instance, the power to settle railroad or coal mining strikes lest interstate rail shipping be interrupted, as was claimed repeatedly by our federal government. NeStrikers would have to be physically blocking lines that cross state borders precisely where they cross state borders.


6 posted on 04/30/2012 2:38:25 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: frithguild

NeStrikers = Strikers


7 posted on 04/30/2012 2:40:06 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson