APP - The Commerce Clause Regulates Free Trade, Period

[DamnYankee]

Liberals claim that the "commerce clause", Article I Section 8 Clause 2 of the Constitution gives the federal government broad powers.

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,
and with the Indian Tribes;

This is simply a vain attempt to redefine the word "commerce" to suit their argument. But according to Webster, in this context, "commerce" means "the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place." Dictionaries in the Colonial era say essentially the same thing. Thus "commerce" is used to define activities of free trade and nothing more.

Commerce is also discussed in Article I, Section 9: "No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another..." Thus "commerce", again, is used to define activities of free trade, nothing more.

No where in the Federalist Papers or Madison's notes of the Constitutional Convention is the term "commerce" used to describe anything beyond free trade.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

the commerce clause has been tortured beyond repair by liberals who wanted to regulate a persons life in every aspect.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

some conservative justices expanded it as well

 

[SmarterthanYou]

some conservative justices expanded it as well

very true, scalia comes to mind. so much for originalism

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Liberals claim that the "commerce clause", Article I Section 8 Clause 2 of the Constitution gives the federal government broad powers.

I have to correct you here. "Liberals" did not make this interpretation of the "Commerce Clause". The Supreme Court of The United States of America has made that interpretation and they did so a long assed time ago. So, due to that misrepresentation, you have all ready started your discussion with a strawman. It goes down hill from there.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

some conservative justices expanded it as well

Exactly! Thank you!

 

[/MSG/]

I have to correct you here. "Liberals" did not make this interpretation of the "Commerce Clause". The Supreme Court of The United States of America has made that interpretation and they did so a long assed time ago. So, due to that misrepresentation, you have all ready started your discussion with a strawman. It goes down hill from there.

'Who' has done so is of little relevance when the injustice has occurred all the same.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

'Who' has done so is of little relevance when the injustice has occurred all the same.

spoken like a true patriot.

 

[DamnYankee]

I have to correct you here. "Liberals" did not make this interpretation of the "Commerce Clause". The Supreme Court of The United States of America has made that interpretation and they did so a long assed time ago. So, due to that misrepresentation, you have all ready started your discussion with a strawman. It goes down hill from there.

Cite.

 

[Don Quixote]

I have to correct you here. "Liberals" did not make this interpretation of the "Commerce Clause". The Supreme Court of The United States of America has made that interpretation and they did so a long assed time ago. So, due to that misrepresentation, you have all ready started your discussion with a strawman. It goes down hill from there.

thank you

i was wondering when the above posters were appointed to scotus

 

[Minister of Truth]

If liberals disagreed with the rulings, they would obviously have been long overturned.