Keyword: commerceclause

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Constitutional Use of Toll Revenue the Subject of Recent Federal Court Decision

    09/10/2016 8:01:28 PM PDT · by Tolerance Sucks Rocks · 20 replies
    Lexology ^ | September 8, 2016 | Nossaman LLP - Fredric W. Kessler and Shant Boyajian
    Public agencies with toll-setting authority should take note of a recent federal court decision relating to the uses of user fees and toll revenue, as well as the stated goals of the plaintiff in that case.The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently clarified the constitutional uses of toll revenue in American Trucking Associations v. New York State Thruway Authority, 13 Civ. 8123 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 10, 2016). In this case, commercial trucking companies and the American Trucking Associations (ATA) claimed that the New York State Thruway Authority violated the Constitution by charging inflated toll rates...
  • Maryland has been illegally double-taxing residents who pay income tax to other states

    05/18/2015 9:29:06 AM PDT · by Brad from Tennessee · 24 replies
    Washington Post ^ | May 18, 2015 | By Bill Turque
    A divided Supreme Court said Monday that Maryland’s income tax law is unconstitutional because it does not provide a full tax credit to residents for income tax paid outside the state, a ruling likely to cost Maryland counties and localities across the country millions of dollars in revenue. The court voted 5-4 to affirm a 2013 Maryland Court of Appeals decision that the state’s practice of withholding a credit on the county segment of the state income tax violated the Commerce Clause because it might discourage individuals from doing business across state lines. In most states, income from elsewhere is...
  • Federal Interstate Handgun Sales Ban Ruled Unconstitutional [is this hugh or what?]

    02/11/2015 10:59:05 AM PST · by NewJerseyJoe · 77 replies
    Firearms Policy Coalition ^ | 2/11/15 | CCRKBA / Alan Gura
    In another excellent victory for civil rights by attorney Alan Gura, United States District Court Judge Reed O’Connor struck down the federal interstate handgun sales ban earlier today, finding it unconstitutional (both facially and as-applied) under the Second Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
  • District court strikes down endangered species protections for exceeding the scope of federal power

    11/06/2014 11:00:57 AM PST · by right-wing agnostic · 8 replies
    The Volokh Conspiracy ^ | November 5, 2014 | Jonathan H. Adler
    This afternoon a district court in Utah held that the federal prohibition against “taking” Utah prairie dogs — listed as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act — exceeds the scope of federal power under the Commerce and Necessary and Proper clauses. Here is how Judge Dee Benson summarized his conclusion in People for the Ethical Treatment of Property Owners v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Although the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress to do many things, it does not authorize Congress to regulate takes of a purely intrastate species that has no substantial effect on interstate commerce. Congress similarly lacks authority...
  • Sen. Graham to Introduce 20-Week Abortion Ban Bill

    11/02/2013 9:41:02 PM PDT · by Olog-hai · 47 replies
    Newsmax ^ | Saturday, 02 Nov 2013 12:07 PM | Sandy Fitzgerald
    Senate Republicans, led by South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, are pushing for a federal ban on abortions after the end of the 20th week of pregnancy. … The planned legislation, though, will face many challenges, not only from the Democratic-controlled Senate, but from some Republicans like Sen. Mike Lee, Utah, who has concerns about Congress’ authority to regulate commerce as the law’s basis. …
  • Sen. Mike Lee: Why John Roberts Was Wrong About Healthcare

    08/02/2013 3:16:24 PM PDT · by Jim Robinson · 45 replies
    cnsnews [video at source] ^ | Aug 2, 2013 | By Terence P. Jeffrey - Chief Justice John Roberts’ 2012 opinion declaring the Obamacare law constitutional was self-contradictory, intellectually indefensible and just plain wrong. Thus argues Sen. Mike Lee (R.-Utah) in a new e-book, Why John Roberts Was Wrong About Healthcare: A Conservative Critique of the Supreme Court’s Obamacare Ruling. Lee appeared on Online With Terry Jeffrey to discuss the book, what he sees as the potential long-term ramifications of Roberts’ decision, and what he believes Congress should do to counter it. Terry Jeffrey: Sen. Mike Lee of Utah was elected to the Senate in 2010. He graduated from Brigham Young University and...
  • Push for online sales taxes picks up steam in Congress

    02/15/2013 3:27:45 PM PST · by CutePuppy · 23 replies
    Chicago Tribune ^ | February 14, 2013 | Reuters
    U.S. states could collect millions of dollars in online sales taxes, with members of both parties in Congress sponsoring legislation Thursday that would resolve states' decades-long struggle to tax businesses beyond their borders. "Small businesses and states alike are suffering from the inability to collect due — not new — taxes from purchases made online," said Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., adding the legislation is a "bipartisan, bicameral, common-sense solution that promotes states' rights and levels the playing field for our Main Street businesses." Legislation on the Amazon tax, named for the colossal Internet retailer, has languished for years. ..... <...
  • Vanity: Help me Battle the Statism in Academia

    01/08/2013 7:00:10 PM PST · by Crapgame · 17 replies
    Freepers here is an opportunity to influence young minds in college. I am an adjunct professor of humanities. Later this month I will begin teaching two courses on the American Experience and Constitutional Change. Every semester I give a term paper assignment based on Wickard v. Filburn and the governmental abuse of the Commerce Clause. I am always gratified by the comments of the students afterwards who tell me they never had any idea of the vast power employed by the government in our daily lives. Well I will still use that case this semester because it is so insructive...
  • Hemingway Cat Descendants Are Regulated by Federal Law, Appeals Court Says

    12/14/2012 12:19:15 PM PST · by Mr. Know It All · 15 replies
    ABA Journal ^ | 12/11/2012 | Debra Cassens Weiss
    Descendants of Ernest Hemingway’s six-toed cat Snowball that live at his museum home are subject to federal regulation because they substantially affect interstate commerce, a federal appeals court has ruled. The cats roam the late author’s former Key West home at 907 Whitehead Street, now a museum that hosts daily tours and weddings, report the Christian Science Monitor and National Public Radio. On Friday, the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled (PDF) that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has the authority to regulate the felines.
  • VANITY: 70 Years Ago Today Freedom Wept

    11/09/2012 8:44:18 AM PST · by pepsi_junkie · 11 replies | 11/9/2012 | pepsi_junkie
    Today, November 9, is a pivotal date in American history. It was 70 years ago today where America began a slow but relentless transformation from a free society where the people are sovereign to one where we are tokens of the government. In 1941 Roscoe Filburn harvested wheat he had planted on his own land and he sold a portion but he kept the rest for his own use. This was a problem, because the government had passed a law in 1938 that said you could only grow so much wheat; it planned to prop up prices by limiting supply....
  • Experts: Courts Likely to Uphold New York Soda Ban

    09/16/2012 6:37:15 PM PDT · by Tolerance Sucks Rocks · 55 replies
    US News and World Report ^ | September 14, 2012 | Jason Koebler
    Legal challenges to New York City's ban on sodas larger than 16 ounces are unlikely to be successful, and the ban could spark similar moves in other cities around the country, according to experts. Thursday, after the city's board of health formally prohibited restaurants from selling sodas larger than 16 ounces after March 12, 2013, organizations around New York City said they would consider suing the city to get the ban overturned. Laura Palantone, a spokesperson for New York City Beverage Choices, a group against the ban, says the organization will "carefully review the regulation and explore our options now...
  • Paul Ryan Says Feds Shouldn’t Interfere With Legalized Medical Pot

    09/07/2012 6:59:04 PM PDT · by Ken H · 155 replies
    KCBS ^ | September 7, 2012
    COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (CBS/AP) – Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan tells a Colorado television station that the federal government shouldn’t interfere with states that have legalized medical marijuana. Ryan told KRDO-TV in Colorado Springs that he personally doesn’t approve of medical marijuana laws. But he said that states should have the right to choose whether to legalize the drug for medical purposes.
  • Plastic regulations: Statewide regulations needed as Santa Cruz ban adds to confusion

    07/14/2012 6:06:14 AM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 28 replies
    Santa Cruz Sentinel ^ | July 12, 2012 | Editorial
    The city of Santa Cruz, usually at the forefront of environmental causes, became the latest, but probably not the last, local government to ban single-use plastic bags, with the 6-0 vote by the City Council Tuesday night. Santa Cruz banned foam products as well. Santa Cruz's new law on foam products, for instance, will outlaw foam coolers, toys, shipping containers and packing peanuts. The city of Capitola also bans foam ice chests and coolers, and the county bans foam food containers. The 48 and counting plastic bag and foam bans of some type in California offer a patchwork of regulations,...
  • Surprises In Supreme Court Ruling on Obamacare

    07/06/2012 2:20:24 AM PDT · by kathsua · 10 replies
    Town Hall ^ | July 05, 2012 | Richard Larsen
    Well, it’s official. It’s now constitutional for politicians to tell huge lies, and not only get away with it, but be rewarded for it. The Supreme Court’s ruling on Obamacare this week confirmed what most of us realized all along, that President Obama and congressional supporters of the “Affordable Care Act” lied to the nation, to all of us! They told us that it was not a tax increase, ardently, vehemently, and ad nauseam, yet that’s the very justification the Supreme Court used to rule it constitutional this week. While debating the Act in congress, proponents claimed constitutional authority for...
  • Surprises In Supreme Court Ruling on Obamacare

    07/06/2012 2:19:09 AM PDT · by kathsua · 5 replies
    Town Hall ^ | July 05, 2012 | Richard Larsen
    Well, it’s official. It’s now constitutional for politicians to tell huge lies, and not only get away with it, but be rewarded for it. The Supreme Court’s ruling on Obamacare this week confirmed what most of us realized all along, that President Obama and congressional supporters of the “Affordable Care Act” lied to the nation, to all of us! They told us that it was not a tax increase, ardently, vehemently, and ad nauseam, yet that’s the very justification the Supreme Court used to rule it constitutional this week. While debating the Act in congress, proponents claimed constitutional authority for...
  • George Will: The consolation prize (The commerce clause was rejected.)

    06/29/2012 9:40:43 AM PDT · by neverdem · 67 replies
    Human Events ^ | 6/28/2012 | George Will
    Conservatives won a substantial victory on Thursday. The physics of American politics — actions provoking reactions — continues to move the crucial debate, about the nature of the American regime, toward conservatism. Chief Justice John Roberts has served this cause. The health care legislation’s expansion of the federal government’s purview has improved our civic health by rekindling interest in what this expansion threatens — the Framers’ design for limited government. Conservatives distraught about the survival of the individual mandate are missing the considerable consolation prize they won when the Supreme Court rejected a constitutional... --snip-- When Nancy Pelosi, asked where...
  • Thomas Dissents: It’s All Unconstitutional

    06/29/2012 4:55:10 PM PDT · by Para-Ord.45 · 57 replies ^ | June 29 2012 | by Daniel Horowitz
    Oh, how far we’ve deviated from our Founders in just over 200 years. The entire country is pouring over an incoherent, internally contradictory, ill-conceived and politically motivated decision by Chief Justice Roberts, which grants Congress the power to regulate anything that moves and the power to tax anything that moves and anything that doesn’t move. Amidst the garrulous analysis from the conservative pundit class on the Roberts decision, there is a one-page dissent from Justice Thomas (in addition to his joint dissent with the other 3 conservatives) that has been overlooked. The joint dissent with Scalia, Alito, and Kennedy focuses...
  • Ken Cuccinelli, on second thought, likes Supreme Court health-care decision

    06/28/2012 1:56:33 PM PDT · by Hunton Peck · 38 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | 02:44 PM ET, 06/28/2012 | Laura Vozzella
    CNN and Fox News aren’t the only ones doing a 180 on the Supreme Court ruling. Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R), the first attorney generalin the nation to file a lawsuit over President Obama’s health-care overhaul, said the sky was pretty much falling in a news release issued half an hour after the court upheld the law. “This is a dark day for the American people, the Constitution, and the rule of law,” Cuccinelli said in the release. “This is a dark day for American liberty.” By the time he held a news conference an hour and 45...
  • Conservatives’ consolation prize [George Will on 0bamacare decision]

    06/28/2012 1:48:52 PM PDT · by Hunton Peck · 49 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | Thursday, June 28, 2012, 1:56 PM | George F. Will
    Conservatives won a substantial victory Thursday. The physics of American politics — actions provoking reactions — continues to move the crucial debate, about the nature of the American regime, toward conservatism. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has served this cause. The health-care legislation’s expansion of the federal government’s purview has improved our civic health by rekindling interest in what this expansion threatens — the Framers’ design for limited government. Conservatives distraught about the survival of the individual mandate are missing the considerable consolation prize they won when the Supreme Court rejected a constitutional rationale for the mandate — Congress’s...
  • Obama Wins the Battle, Roberts Wins the War

    06/28/2012 12:15:09 PM PDT · by Lorianne · 99 replies
    Slate Scocca ^ | 28 June 2012 | Tom
    The chief justice’s canny move to uphold the Affordable Care Act while gutting the Commerce Clause. The scholars expected to see the court gut existing Commerce Clause ... Roberts was smarter than that. By ruling that the individual mandate was permissible as a tax, he joined the Democratic appointees to uphold the law—while joining the Republican wing to gut the Commerce Clause (and push back against the necessary-and-proper clause as well). Here's the Chief Justice's opinion (italics in original): Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and...
  • Scalia book: Landmark Supreme Court decision in 1942 expanded Commerce Clause “beyond all reason”

    06/19/2012 8:52:12 PM PDT · by Ken H · 23 replies ^ | JUNE 18, 2012 | ALLAHPUNDIT
    -snip-Justice Scalia writes, for instance, that he has little use for a central precedent the Obama administration has cited to justify the health care law under the Constitution’s commerce clause, Wickard v. Filburn. In that 1942 decision, Justice Scalia writes, the Supreme Court “expanded the Commerce Clause beyond all reason” by ruling that “a farmer’s cultivation of wheat for his own consumption affected interstate commerce and thus could be regulated under the Commerce Clause.”… Justice Scalia’s treatment of the Wickard case had been far more respectful in his judicial writings. In the book’s preface, he explains (referring to himself in...
  • Utah's Liljenquist Pledges to Work to Repeal NDAA and 17th Amendment

    04/25/2012 4:09:49 PM PDT · by Tolerance Sucks Rocks · 48 replies
    The New American ^ | April 25, 2012 | Joe Wolverton, II
    Candidate for Senate Dan Liljenquist (left) pledged to The New American that should he be elected to the U.S. Senate he will offer legislation explicitly repealing the indefinite detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). In a press conference held on April 24 at 2:00 p.m. (MDT), the former Utah State Senator and current GOP challenger to six-term Senator Orrin Hatch described the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA as “an overreach and a violation of the Bill of Rights.” He said that had he been in office when Congress voted to pass the NDAA he would have...
  • Men in Black

    04/04/2012 8:37:32 AM PDT · by Belteshazzar · 20 replies
    The New York Times ^ | April 3, 2012 | Maureen Dowd
    How dare President Obama brush back the Supreme Court like that? Has this former constitutional law instructor no respect for our venerable system of checks and balances? Nah. And why should he? This court, cosseted behind white marble pillars, out of reach of TV, accountable to no one once they give the last word, is well on its way to becoming one of the most divisive in modern American history. It has squandered even the semi-illusion that it is the unbiased, honest guardian of the Constitution. It is run by hacks dressed up in black robes ...
  • To Save ObamaCare, Obama Does Full Court Press

    04/03/2012 5:03:31 PM PDT · by Kaslin · 15 replies
    IBD Editorials ^ | April 3, 2012
    Checks And Balances: A president with no respect for the Constitution warns of judicial activism by a Supreme Court reviewing his landmark legislation's constitutionality. It would be unconstitutional to let it stand. Someone will have to remind President Obama the Supreme Court is a co-equal branch of government, part of a system of checks and balances designed to rein in precisely the kind of runaway government exhibited by his administration. Our community-organizer-in-chief has a different opinion. "Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was...
  • Justice Breyer's unhinged Commerce Clause ramblings

    03/29/2012 10:12:12 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 20 replies
    Washington Examiner ^ | 03/29/2012 | by Conn Carroll
    I was listening to the tape-delayed Obamacare oral arguments in the car Tuesday when I first heard Justice Breyer's Commerce Clause diatribe, and I meant to post something when I got home. But after making dinner and putting the kids to bed, I forgot.Until today, that is, when I read Jeffrey Anderson's account of "Breyer's Missteps." I think Jeffrey is far too generous to Breyer. Here is a fuller transcript of Breyer's outburst: I look back into history, and I think if we look back into history we see sometimes Congress can create commerce out of nothing. That's the...
  • Liberty and ObamaCare

    03/26/2012 9:20:03 AM PDT · by american_steve · 4 replies · 10+ views
    The constitutional questions the Affordable Care Act poses are great, novel and grave, as much today as they were when they were first posed in an op-ed on these pages by the Washington lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey on September 18, 2009. The appellate circuits are split, as are legal experts of all interpretative persuasions. The Obama Administration and its allies are already planning to attack the Court's credibility and legitimacy if it overturns the Affordable Care Act. They will claim it is a purely political decision, but this should not sway the Justices any more than should the...
  • Live Thread: SCOTUS hearings on Obamacare [Day 3 Arguments; Post 153+]

    03/26/2012 8:11:01 AM PDT · by BuckeyeTexan · 163 replies · 151+ views
    National Review ^ | 0/26/2012 | Avik Roy
    <p>I will be live-blogging the Supreme Court hearings on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act from March 26 to 28, beginning at 10 a.m. on Monday. I invite readers and NRO contributors to chip in with their observations. I will also incorporate Twitter feeds from various people from the health-care and legal worlds who are covering the case.</p>
  • Antonin Scalia's ObamaCare Problem

    03/02/2012 3:26:26 PM PST · by neverdem · 25 replies
    Reason ^ | March 1, 2012 | Damon W. Root
    The Obama administration repeatedly cites the conservative Supreme Court justice in defense of its health care overhaul. When the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments later this month on whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate, which requires all Americans to buy or secure health insurance, oversteps Congress’ lawful authority to regulate interstate commerce, the Obama administration will be drawing heavily from the legal arguments of a surprising ally: conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. That’s because in 2005, when the Supreme Court last heard a major Commerce Clause challenge to a federal regulation, Scalia sided with the liberal...
  • ObamaCare survival could depend on Roosevelt "New Deal" Supreme Court

    02/29/2012 9:29:41 AM PST · by Oldpuppymax · 10 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | 2/29/2012 | Doug Book
    In 1942, one of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Supreme Courts ruled that an Ohio farmer named Filburn was NOT permitted to raise the amount of wheat he wished on his own farm, for the purpose of feeding his own family. And for 70 years this and a handful of similar, overreaching decisions by the Court have resulted in the wholesale abuse of a power granted Congress in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, namely the “Commerce Clause.” (1) In the Wickard v Filburn case, the Court opened to Congress the nearly unlimited power to exercise legislative authority relating to...
  • New Consumer Financial Protection chief thinks the Commerce Clause trumps Constitution on obamacare

    01/05/2012 4:56:12 PM PST · by John S Mosby · 14 replies
    Real Clear Politics ^ | April 4, 2010 | Ohio News Network
    President Obama's appointee to the Consumer protection bureau Richard Cordray is a staunch supporter of Obamacare. He has said the lawsuits against the legislation were "frivolous" because of the commerce clause.
  • Retired justice says Supreme Court likely to uphold health care law

    09/29/2011 2:07:32 PM PDT · by Red Steel · 58 replies
    Yahoo News ^ | Wed, Sep 28, 2011 | Liz Goodwin
    Ninety-one-year-old retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens told Bloomberg News that he thinks President Obama's health care law will pass constitutional muster. He referenced a 2005 Supreme Court decision that held the federal government could outlaw state-sanctioned medical marijuana even if the substance didn't cross state lines, which was based on a broad interpretation of the commerce clause.
  • ObamaCare and the Constitutional Road Not Taken

    08/22/2011 10:04:42 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 3 replies
    Pajamas Media ^ | August 22, 2011 | Rick Richman
    Why there is a good chance the individual mandate will be struck down by the Supreme Court. The Eleventh Circuit majority opinion (nicely summarized by Dan Miller) is noteworthy not only as the most thorough judicial discussion to date — 207 pages — but as an opinion written jointly by Chief Judge Joel F. Dubina (appointed by the first President Bush) and Judge Frank M. Hull (appointed by President Clinton). As a single opinion, co-authored by two experienced judges, appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents, it has considerable persuasive force.The federal district courts have divided on the constitutionality of ObamaCare...
  • Looking for Limits (Obamacare precedent would give U.S. government unlimited power over population)

    08/19/2011 5:01:32 PM PDT · by rabscuttle385 · 17 replies
    Reason ^ | 2011-08-17 | Jacob Sullum
    The power to mandate health insurance is the power to mandate almost anything. (snip) Under our system of government....Congress has only those powers that are explicitly enumerated in the Constitution, with the rest "reserved to the states respectively, or to the people"....An all-encompassing Commerce Clause that authorizes any mandate, restriction, or prohibition aimed at behavior that might affect interstate commerce (subject to specific limits such as those imposed by the Bill of Rights) is plainly inconsistent with this federal system. he Obama administration therefore needs to explain why its constitutional rationale for the health insurance mandate—that the failure to obtain...
  • Proposed road rules for farmers anger some

    08/03/2011 9:16:10 AM PDT · by bkopto · 72 replies
    Billings Gazette ^ | July 25, 2011 | Tom Lutey
    Tractors lumbering down country roads are as common as deer in rural Montana, but the federal government wants to place new driving regulations on farmers and ranchers. “It’s a huge deal for us,” said John Youngberg of the Montana Farm Bureau. After years of allowing state governments to waive commercial driver’s license requirements for farmers hauling crops or driving farm equipment on public roads, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is poised to do away with the exceptions. Regulators are suggesting that all wheat shipments be considered interstate, even when farmers making short hauls to local grain elevators aren’t crossing...
  • A "Commerce Clause Amendment"

    07/20/2011 8:58:13 AM PDT · by frithguild · 25 replies
    Vanity | 8/20/2011 | frithguild
    The interests of each constituent group in the Democrat Party coalition shows how distorted our federal government has become, all due to the errors of the Supreme Court. Swift v. United States, 196 U.S. 375 (1905) found that federal regulation of meat packing to prevent price fixing permissable because the regulated activity had an "affect" on commerce. And the trust busting Teddy Roosevelt smiled. A generation later, the New Deal took root in the the redefinition that consideration of an "impact" or "effect" on commerce permits. Justice Thomas filed a brilliant concurring opinion in U.S. v. Lopez 514 U.S. 549...
  • A Gun Activist Takes Aim at U.S. Regulatory Power

    07/14/2011 4:41:12 AM PDT · by marktwain · 27 replies ^ | 14 July, 2011 | JESS BRAVIN
    MISSOULA, Mont.—With a homemade .22-caliber rifle he calls the Montana Buckaroo, Gary Marbut dreams of taking down the federal regulatory state. He's not planning to fire his gun. Instead, he wants to sell it, free from federal laws requiring him to record transactions, pay license fees and open his business to government inspectors. For years, Mr. Marbut argued that a wide range of federal laws, not just gun regulations, should be invalid because they were based on an erroneous interpretation of Congress's constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce. In his corner were a handful of conservative lawyers and academics. Now,...
  • Brutal Mexican drug gang crosses into U.S.-- Zetas butcher victims to spread message of fear

    04/19/2011 6:35:17 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 56 replies
    The Washington Times ^ | April 19, 2011 | Jerry Seper
    The signature crimes of the most violent drug cartel in Mexico are its beheading and dismemberment of rival gang members, military personnel, law enforcement officers and public officials, and the random kidnappings and killings of civilians who get caught in its butchery and bloodletting. But this disparate band of criminals known as Los Zetas is no longer just a concern in Mexico. It has expanded its deadly operations across the southwestern border, establishing footholds and alliances in states from New York to California. Just last year, federal agents tied a cocaine operation in Baltimore to the Zetas. “Those of us...
  • The scariest defense for ObamaCare

    03/05/2011 3:30:28 AM PST · by Scanian · 18 replies
    NY Post ^ | March 4, 2011 | Rich Lowry
    'I can take care of my enemies all right," Warren Harding once said. "But my friends, my damn friends, they're the ones that keep me walking the floor nights!" In the sense that so irked Harding, Judge Gladys Kessler is a great good friend of ObamaCare. The US district-court judge in Washington, DC, delivered a more telling blow against the law in the course of ruling it constitutional than critics have in assailing it as a travesty. At issue is the individual mandate. Two other district-court judges have struck it down on grounds that Congress doesn't have the power under...
  • Federal Judge Rules Congress Can Regulate "Mental Activity" Under Commerce Clause

    02/23/2011 8:10:37 AM PST · by ConjunctionJunction · 46 replies
    The American Spectator ^ | February 22, 2011 | Philip Klein
    A federal judge has upheld the national health care law, making it the fifth ruling on the merits of the legal challenges to the individual mandate. The ruling by the Clinton appointee, U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler of the District of Columbia continues the pattern of Democratic-appointed judges siding with the Obama administration and Republican judges siding with the plaintiffs in ruling the mandate unconstitutional. Kessler's ruling comes in a case brought by individual plaintiffs, where as the two decisions striking down the mandate have come in cases brought by 27 states, based in Virginia and Florida. Like the...
  • Handicapping Obamacare #1 - Justice Thomas

    02/14/2011 8:15:42 PM PST · by Involuntary Servitude · 12 replies
    My Involuntary Servitude ^ | February 14, 2011 | Involuntary Servitude
    As I promised in a previous post, I'm going to work my way through the Supreme Court justices and try and determine how likely each is to vote that Congress exceeded its authority under the Commerce Clause when it enacted the individual mandate. I'll start with Justice Thomas. This is the good news! I'll be researching these posts as I do them, but my initial somewhat educated impression is that Justice Thomas is probably the only Justice who is close to being a very high probability "unconstitutional vote" in a case decided on the merits. To start at the beginning,...
  • Scalia and the Commerce Clause

    02/09/2011 8:53:15 AM PST · by Hawk720 · 37 replies
    National Review ^ | Feburary 9, 2011 | Robert VerBruggen
    As the challenge to Obamacare’s constitutionality approaches the Supreme Court, the question on everyone’s mind is: How will Anthony Kennedy vote? But perhaps we should also ask: How will Antonin Scalia vote? Scalia is known as one of the Court’s most conservative justices, but a concurrence he wrote in a 2005 case should give opponents of the health-care law pause.
  • Dems: Commerce Can Be Taxed & Congress Can Tax, So Congress Can Force Commerce Via The Ind. Mandate

    01/19/2011 4:39:19 PM PST · by Laissez-faire capitalist · 12 replies
    1/13/2011 | Laissez-Faire Capitalist
    The thread title pretty much sums up the argument being put forward by Democrats. They believe that since commerce can be taxed, and the Constitution gives Congress the power to tax, that they can implement forced commerce and make people purchase health care coverage per the individual mandate. This argument is similar to "Murder is wrong, therefore capital punishment is wrong." Just as this is a false conclusion (capital punishment hasn't been proven to be murder) and begs the question, so too does the argument being put forward by center-left Democrats. Just because Congress can tax commerce does not mean...
  • Never Play Monopoly with Uncle Sam

    12/24/2010 11:17:01 AM PST · by scocha · 4 replies ^ | December 24, 2010 | S.H.Chambers
    On December 13, 2010, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson ruled in Virginia v. Sebelius that the individual mandate included in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), popularly known as Obamacare, is unconstitutional.
  • Chamber’s Donohue: ‘Regulatory Tsunami’ Coming

    11/17/2010 1:25:42 PM PST · by Slyscribe · 29 replies
    IBD's Capital Hill ^ | 11/17/2010 | Sean Higgins
    Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue indicated on Wednesday that the business group was looking past Congress and focusing more on federal regulators now that the election’s over. Donohue, during an address to members this morning, cited the threat of a “regulatory tsunami” as “the biggest single threat to job creation.” He claimed that the EPA is advancing 29 proposed major rules and the Labor Department was pushing “at least 100 regulations and policy changes.” The new financial regulatory overhaul has 320 required rule makings, and ObamaCare creates 183 “agencies, commissions and panels.”
  • SurveyUSA: In CA on Election Eve, Women Solidify Opposition to Prop 19; ("No" leading 46%-44%)

    11/01/2010 10:09:33 PM PDT · by Ken H · 36 replies
    SurveyUSA ^ | November 01, 2010 | n/a
    Full headline:In CA on Election Eve, Women Solidify Opposition to Prop 19; Even the Greater San Francisco Bay Area No Longer Supports Legal Marijuana SurveyUSA Breaking News - 8 hours ago [about 5pm edt] On Election Eve, California remains divided on Proposition 19, with women opposing the measure now more than at any point during the campaign and support in the greater San Francisco Bay Area no greater than opposition, according to SurveyUSA's 8th and final pre-election tracking poll , conducted for KABC-TV in Los Angeles, KPIX-TV in San Francisco, KGTV-TV in San Diego, and KFSN-TV in Fresno. "No" has 46%,...
  • Polls show Support for Prop 19 Waning

    10/30/2010 10:17:43 AM PDT · by SoCal SoCon · 48 replies
    Christian Science Monitor ^ | 10/30/2010 | SoCal SoCon
    In the latest news from my home state, aka La-La Land of the Loony Left, last week's polls showed that the initially high support for Prop 19, which would legalize recreational marijuana, have dropped below 50% .
  • Congressional Report Casts Doubt on Constitutionality of Obamacare's Individual Mandate

    10/26/2010 1:05:24 PM PDT · by Clint N. Suhks · 20 replies ^ | 10/26/10 | Matt Cover
    A report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) casts doubt on the two main arguments used by the Obama administration to defend the individual insurance mandate that is the central component of the controversial health “reform” law. Published on October 15, the CRS report examines the arguments both for and against the constitutionality of the individual mandate, which requires every American to purchase government-approved health insurance or else pay a fine. The mandate, to be enforced by the Internal Revenue Service, has been challenged as an unconstitutional overreach of federal authority in a lawsuit filed by Virginia Attorney General Ken...
  • U.S. Will Enforce Marijuana Laws, (California) State Vote Aside

    10/16/2010 6:50:39 PM PDT · by Bokababe · 81 replies
    NY TImes ^ | 10/15/10 | Adam Nagourny
    LOS ANGELES — The Department of Justice says it intends to prosecute marijuana laws in California aggressively even if state voters approve an initiative on the Nov. 2 ballot to legalize the drug.
  • Federal Court Decision Is a Big Setback for ObamaCare

    10/15/2010 5:13:34 PM PDT · by DanMiller · 21 replies
    Opinion Forum ^ | October 15, 2010 | Dan Miller
    Alice in Wonderland notwithstanding, Congress must say what it means and mean what it says. In an order released on October 14 . . . Judge Vinson of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Pensacola Division, permitted an action by twenty states challenging the mandatory health insurance provisions of ObamaCare to go forward. . . . He noted, "Reviewing courts cannot cannot look beyond a statute and inquire whether meant something different than what it said. "I have no choice but to find that the penalty is not a tax." Judge Vinson continued, noting that by...
  • Cuccinelli Health-Care Suit Gets Support in Court

    10/05/2010 3:59:20 PM PDT · by WilliamIII · 16 replies
    Richmond Times- Dispatch ^ | October 5, 2010 | Jim Nolan
    A Sacramento-based legal group has joined Virginia’s battle against the federal health care overhaul, filing an amicus brief in federal court in Richmond supporting the argument being advanced by Virginia Attorney general Ken Cuccinelli. The Pacific Legal Foundation “friend of the court” brief argues, like Cuccinelli, that the insurance mandate provision of the new health care law violates the Constitution’s Commerce Clause by ordering individual citizens to buy a good or service or face a fine.