Skip to main content

Libertarian comment rescue: Interstate commerce v 2nd Amendment

This comment by GRex over at Hube's place got me started thinking:

They're most likely trying to ride the Craig's List killings and that woman who drove a teenager to commit suicide. Add that to the grandstanding over NCAA football playoffs, and I wonder if there's anything at all that Congress can't mess with under the Interstate Commerce Clause?


Here's what the comment made me think: the Interstate Commerce Clause is the (supposedly) (only) Constitutional basis for virtually all major legislation for the past several decades, but what I never see is any calls for an originalist interpretation of the ICC.

Yet at the same time we are usually inundated with arguments that the 2nd Amendment was only intended to arm militias, or arguments that the Framers never anticipated automatic weapons to justify gun control.

I'm trying to distill this contradiction down to a workable premise, and I think I've got it:

Parts of the Constitution that empower the State can be constantly re-interpreted, but those parts which restrict the power of the State must remain as narrowly limited as possible.

Comments

Hube said…
Amen, Steve!
keydet aka Townie 76 said…
Steve,

Very interesting post. First an interesting comments regarding a linkage between two of your points, the investigation on the need for a playoff for Division 1A football is being chaired by Representative Bobby Rush of Illinois. Representative Bobby Rush is also the same individual who has introduced HR 45 that if passed would make gun ownership illegal.

As you are aware, I am more liberal on some things and more conservative on others than you, however I find that Representative Rush legislation is nefarious. There was a point in my life, that I accepted George Will's belief that the 2nd Amendment was unfortunate; however a number of years ago when doing some in-depth study of the Origins of the Bill of Rights; I came to the conclusion that none of the rights was more scared than another; than in fact they are all fundamental, inalienable rights which the founders believed were essential to ensuring the power of the state remained checked by the citizens. I concluded that the founders knew what what they meant. (As I pointed out to you in an email--unfortunately Congress did not take the language proposed by James Madison which might have ended misunderstanding regarding the 2nd Amendment.)

The problem, is that, there is a certain group within our Society, who wishes to recast the meaning of the Constitution as they want it not as it is. Bobby Rush does not understand the purpose of the Bill of Rights nor does he understand the purpose of the Constitution; that the Bill of Rights protects the citizens and states from the concentrated power of the central government; and that the Constitution defines what the central government must do and what it can not do.

Whether Congress should be telling the NCAA how to run corrupt college sports is another debate; however I would point out that the NCAA was born out of the actions of a very activists President--Teddy Roosevelt.

Hank Foresman
The Last Ephor said…
This divide was most recently illuminated with split between Scalia and Thomas over the medical marijuana issue before the USSC. Scalia argued that the interstate clause may apply even if the stuff was produced and consumed w/in the state exclusively as it might impact prices across the several states. Thomas countered that anything would then be covered under the clause including garage sales, quilting bees and everything else.

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?