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

To: dayglored; Lurking Libertarian
unconstitutional, since Congress is explicitly granted the power in the Constitution to establish copyrights.

commerce clause

something somewhere , some how , may be sold ... or may not be sold ...

If they can say growing grain to feed your own stock is regulatable via the commerce clause because you would have had to go out in to the open market and make a purchase ... but you didn’t because you grew your own , therefor impacting the world market prices of grain ...

then they can say anything is covered under the commerce clause.

it’s a another power grab

174 posted on 05/15/2007 8:04:46 PM PDT by THEUPMAN (####### comment deleted by moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]


To: THEUPMAN
If they can say growing grain to feed your own stock is regulatable via the commerce clause because you would have had to go out in to the open market and make a purchase ... but you didn’t because you grew your own , therefor impacting the world market prices of grain ...

The Supreme Court just repeated that analysis a year or two ago in upholding federal laws against California's attempt to legalize growing your own marijuana for medical use. Even Scalia held that that was a valid use of the commerce clause, on the theory that if people can grow their own marijuana some of it might be diverted to interstate sales.

But in this case, however misguided the legislation is, I think it is constitutional under the copyrights clause combined with the necessary and proper clause; the commerce clause doesn't even have to enter into the analysis.

182 posted on 05/16/2007 9:21:11 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | 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