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

To: dcwusmc

From what I understand the feds can step in and deal with anything involving interstate commerce. And since drugs come across our border from other countries and cross state lines in their distribution paths it is first up to the federal government to deal with and enact laws controlling the interstate commerce of such. If the feds don’t do their jobs in this capacity then it falls to the states to deal with them as in the case of illegal immigration. Since the feds refuse to enforce the laws on immigration, then it is left to the states to deal with it as AZ has been doing.

The entire reason for the federal government is military and to control interstate commerce.


139 posted on 09/02/2011 1:19:21 PM PDT by RickB444 (What one receives without working for, another must work for without receiving.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]


To: RickB444

Nice try, but a hugh and series FAIL!! The Commerce clause, in the clearly stated intent of the Founders, is intended SOLELY to ensure that the states do not set up barriers to interstate trade, such as imposing tariffs on goods coming in from another state or even just passing through, so as to prevent competition to in-state businesses. They specifically noted that FedGov was NOT to have the authority it has USURPED ever since Teddy Roosevelt, Woody Wilson and FDR. So if that’s what you’re hanging your drug warrior hat on, you’re in good Socialist company... and 1,000% WRONG!


141 posted on 09/02/2011 1:40:41 PM PDT by dcwusmc (A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

To: RickB444
Scalia and Thomas are 180 degrees apart on the Commerce Clause. Both can't be right. Which of the following is the originalist position, im your opinion?

_____________________________________

...the authority to enact laws necessary and proper for the regulation of interstate commerce is not limited to laws governing intrastate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.

J. Scalia, concurring in Raich

______________________________________

Respondents Diane Monson and Angel Raich use marijuana that has never been bought or sold, that has never crossed state lines, and that has had no demonstrable effect on the national market for marijuana. If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything, and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.

J.Thomas, dissenting in Raich

144 posted on 09/02/2011 3:00:37 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | 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