Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
what you guys never seem to get, when you belittle the arguments against the law is that it's been shot down by Appeals Courts already. Anything you don't like is stupid and purely politics.
|
It's also been upheld by Appeals Courts already.
And it's not stupid. It's highly clever. Randy Barnett and the rest were very smart in coming up with something entirely new to argue for why this isn't otherwise squarely within the precedents, which wasn't an easy task.
The thing his Prof. Barnett should have won in Raich -- both "interstate" and "commerce" should be the actual limits on commerce clause power. "Inactivity" and "omg, no limit on federal power" should not be.
But those latter two have not yet been rejected by the supreme court, so they give the conservative majority something to hang their hat on when they ultimately make the ruling that their political fellow travelers want them to make.
My problem with that is the peg seems pretty darn weak to me, especially when coupled with decisions like Raich.
