A tea party shoutout
From the Vinson ruling:
It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate givingthe East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.
If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failingto engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain for it would be “difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power” [Lopez, supra, 514 U.S. at 564], and we would have a Constitution in name only. Surely this is not what the Founding Fathers could have intended.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0111/A_tea_party_shoutout.html
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 1, 2011 at 7:42 am
gumply
Finally we found someone with convictions on the Constitution that isn’t afraid to stand up and be counted.
February 2, 2011 at 7:13 am
gumply
I just read where he was one of the judges that received one of the presentments when they first came out about the liar in cheat’s ineligibility and he did nothing about it.
I don’t understand what is going on in this country. Everywhere you go there are article’s about his ineligibility and comments everywhere and nothing is done about it. Even Congressmen have mentioned it and yet nada, zilch. It is like everyone is terrified. We can’t find one defender of the Constitution with any authority that has any guts.
Where or where is a Founder. Someone willing to put his life and fortune on the line. There are some but they weren’t powerful enough so they are now or have been in prison.
Only God can help us.
February 2, 2011 at 1:25 pm
JAMES
It was noted yesterday that very few of his rulings have been reversed on appeal. He is usually very thorough in his opinions, and it is believed that the way he framed this one, it will survive appeal, forcing the Obama team to move it to the Supreme Court.