Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: robertpaulsen
Well, the USSC went further than that

Get this through your head. Nobody here is denying that SCOTUS has a very expansive reading of the commerce clause. Citing their opinions does not advance your position in this discussion, because all it amounts to is a circular argument. Most of what follows in your post is based on that flawed premise of yours. If you want to make a point, quote the Constitution and, if necessary, the founders, and go from there.

Do you disagree with the statement, "Congress can certainly regulate interstate commerce to the extent of forbidding and punishing the use of such commerce as an agency to promote immorality, dishonesty, or the spread of any evil or harm to the people of other States from the State of origin."

What I'm saying is that in order to prevent that from happening, they can not restrict the generation of said "immorality, dishonesty" or "evil or harm".

356 posted on 11/06/2005 12:08:32 PM PST by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies ]


To: inquest
"What I'm saying is that in order to prevent that from happening, they can not restrict the generation of said "immorality, dishonesty" or "evil or harm"."

Sure they can. That was made very clear in the ruling ... oops. Can't say that.

Yes they can. It's in the U.S. Constitution.

Better?

399 posted on 11/06/2005 1:44:23 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


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