He said that the government can regulate the interstate commerce. The court said that the possession of a gun in a local school zone was NOT an economic activity and did NOT have substantial effect on interstate commerce.
I read through your misrepresentation a mile away.
English is obviously not your strong suit. Do take your time with this.
My position is the constitutional position -- the government can regulate the interstate commerce of everything.
552 posted on 03/09/2007 4:37:27 PM CST by robertpaulsen
SCOTUS disagreed. From US v Morrison: "The Court explained that the need to distinguish between economic activities that directly and those that indirectly affect interstate commerce was due to "the concern that we expressed in Lopez that Congress might use the Commerce Clause to completely obliterate the Constitution’s distinction between national and local authority."
Congress can not regulate the interstate commerce of 'everything'. They, and apparently you, like to think they can. But the Court said it must directly (it's a small word so you shouldn't have much trouble looking it up) affect interstate commerce.
Now off with you or I shall taunt you again.
L
P.S. Your father smelled of elderberries.