Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CrabTree
However, the Constitution clearly leaves it to Congress to regulate interstate commerce.

But this is neither commerce nor interstate. No money or goods changed hands, and nothing involved in the suit ever left the man's property. What this did was to grant federal government to power to regulate virtually anything you own because you might sell it to someone in another state. Do you believe that this is what the plain language of the commerce clause means, and that it comforms to the original intent of the founders when they wrote it?

57 posted on 01/04/2002 10:34:45 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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