05-12-2016, 01:55 AM
(05-11-2016, 06:31 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:(05-11-2016, 03:27 PM)Galen Wrote:(05-11-2016, 12:34 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:(05-11-2016, 02:32 AM)Galen Wrote: Only an idiot progressive would think that clause that would cover an employee and his employer when they reside in the same state. The Supreme Court has pretty much been ignoring the Constitution since the thirties and making shit up as they go along.
I would argue that the Supreme Court has been ignoring the Constitution far longer than the 1930s.
The court didn't have nearly as much of a tendency legislate from the bench as it did after the court packing scheme of the thirties. Now it just rewrites the law to get a desired outcome. They did that twice with Obozocare.
"Only an idiot would believe otherwise" is a poor argument against something that one disagrees with. All too often such is easily refuted as an argument.
I have read many books on the subject and the reason why the commerce clause came into being was because the several states were busy practicing a 'beggar thy neighbor' trade policy against each other. It wasn't until the thirties that a more expansive interpretation came into being. The end result was a decision that held that a farmer growing wheat on his own land for his own purposes was interstate commerce. Anyone with a dictionary and a clue would see this as an absurd decision but progressives tend to lack both of these things.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises