It could easily be argued this is bill of attainder.
... who the HELL are you, telling ME what I HAVE to sell in MY store?
... who the HELL are you, telling ME what I HAVE to sell in MY store?
... who the HELL are you, telling ME what I HAVE to sell in MY store?
Congress could, Chief Justice Warren wrote for the majority, under its commerce power, protect the economy from harm by enacting a prohibition generally applicable to any person who commits certain acts or possesses certain characteristics making him likely in Congress’s view to initiate political strikes or other harmful deeds and leaving it to the courts to determine whether a particular person committed the specified acts or possessed the specified characteristics.
It was impermissible, however, for Congress to designate a class of persons—members of the Communist Party—as being forbidden to hold union office.10 .
However, in United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967), a very similar statute making it unlawful for any member of a “Communist-action organization” to be employed in a defense facility was struck down on First Amendment grounds and the bill of attainder argument was ignored.
The dissenters viewed the statute as merely expressing in shorthand the characteristics of those persons who were likely to utilize union responsibilities to accomplish harmful acts; Congress could validly conclude that all members of the Communist Party possessed those characteristics.11 ---
----------------------------------------------------------------
We used to put homosexuals etal in this class; too. Elect a Muslim? Hardly!!
Next thing ya know, it'll be illegal for a camel to stick it's nose into a tent!
USA might have been a great melting pot experiment, but the dross is being to overshadow the metal.