Replies

Nice try, but no cigar. You're still attempting bend word definitions to your will, but it won't do. What the word implies is not up to you. I thought you people shunned implied meanings in the Constitution anyway. That's the same door the gun-grabbers try to go through with their semantical gymnastics over the phrase "well regulated militia". I ought to be surprised at you using the same tactics used by those people, but I'm not.

Congress has the power to regulate foreign commerce. It can choose, through legislation, which countries it does business with and who it does not to do business with, how much, how often and when. That's just a fact. If you don't like it, if this glaring verity stands in the way of your arguments and rationalizations, that's not my problem.

You're still attempting bend word definitions to your will, but it won't do.

You cannot regulate what you have banned. Furthermore, do you see any definition in the US Constitution which defines as a crime, trading with anyone?

This isn't about implications. It's about simple facts. The purpose for regulating commerce with foreign nations was simply so that no state could end up with an advantage over another state when drawing up trade agreements. It was NOT to eliminate trade with any particular nation.

I've explained this to Poobah but the government doesn't posess any power that it cannot derive by your consent. You first must posess the power for the government to use it. You nor I have the power to prevent anyone from trading with anyone else. Thus we cannot consent to anyone to use such a power.

If the government is using a power that you didn't first posess, then it is operating by force and fraud.

It can choose, through legislation, which countries it does business with and who it does not to do business with, how much, how often and when. That's just a fact.

Nonsense. The government is not authorized anywhere in the constitution to "do business."