Skip to main content

View Diary: Supreme Court, Affordable Care Act: Is the mandate constitutional? (372 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Only rewording perhaps (0+ / 0-)

    The theory is (if you talk to some "state's rights" person- although don't get me started on "judges making law" if anyone ever feeds you that bull tell them that every single decision a judge makes is "law" liberal or conservative. You want to read things into the constitution it is a joke how these non activist judges treat the other Amendments compared to their pets. Show me anywhere in the constitution that it says an INDIVIDUAL has a right to bear arms . . . Now it is the law thanks to Scalia.


    To get back to your Q:

    The Federal Governemnt- has enumerated powers meaning that their powers are directly spelled out in the constitution. If a power is not granted the federal government doesn’t have it
    The State Governments- Their powers are plenary, they are unlimited except by federal law, constitution, and state law.
    State and Federal Law Controversy? -> the federal measure controls. Federal Powers Supersede state laws.

    But, basically by virtue of the Commerce Clause Congress can regulate anything, as I say in a lengthy comment give me any random object and I can show you how the Commerce Clause gives the FEDERAL government power to act. . . .

    •  The Hypocrisy I refer to (0+ / 0-)

      Is the "Conservative" wing of the Courts' "view" on the Establishment Clause and 2nd Amendment, as compared with say the IVth Amendment.

      And Judge made law- is one of those things that if you are honest with yourself is utter talking points. As a lawyer I have to support my argument by decisions. So everytime a judge renders a decision they are "making law". /rant

    •  Thank you (0+ / 0-)

      that helps with my question quite a bit.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site