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

To: OneWingedShark
Wickard v. Fillburn has, since 1942, declared that the intrastate commerce impacts interstate commerce and thereby allows Congressional regulation thereof.

Wickard has no application here. There is no impact to an interstate market by virtue of an individual's movement within a State.

30 posted on 08/06/2013 9:30:37 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (Islam offers choices: convert, submit, or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Carry_Okie
>> Wickard v. Fillburn has, since 1942, declared that the intrastate commerce impacts interstate commerce and thereby allows Congressional regulation thereof.
>
> Wickard has no application here. There is no impact to an interstate market by virtue of an individual's movement within a State.

Tell that to GONZALES v. RAICH, which said: even if there is no interstate market, the federal government can still regulate intrastate commerce because if there was a market, they could regulate that.

Despite the logical nullity, this is the reasoning that they use.

31 posted on 08/06/2013 9:35:03 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | 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