[JCEccles]

It seems often we're angry when the court declares the laws created by congress, and supported by the american people to be unconstitutional. We say the court is legislating from the bench. This time the court has upheld laws created by congress, and supported by the majority of the american people, and we're still angry?

This is Scalia's and Thomas's point of refrence for deciding such cases. They'll both be excoriated by libertarians for this decision, but it is the most Consitutionally-sound decision.

When they uphold such legislation Scalia and Thomas are upholding the right of the people to remain self-governing through their legislatures (mostly state issues but some federal issues too, as here). They are NOT passing judgment on the wisdom of the legislation. They are merely saying, "If you believe the WOD is stupid and wasteful, elect federal lawmakers who agree with you and persuade your fellow citizens across the country that you are right."

How can that be wrong?

[kjam22]

You and I agree.

[dirtboy]

When they uphold such legislation Scalia and Thomas are upholding the right of the people to remain self-governing through their legislatures

Even if that legislation was done by usurping powers that were earlier left to the states by the 10th Amendment? It took a constitutional amendment to ban booze before Wickard. Now the feds do just about whatever the hell they want, and folks applaud the action of the legislature, and the court upholding the law, as something proper, when the federal legislature only got that power through an activist court decision that opened the door for federal usurpation.

[Fishtalk]

How can that be wrong?

It's not.

You are exactly correct.