Supporting Virginia versus Sebelius:
If nothing else, I hope the brief will help dispel the myth that there is an expert consensus to the effect that the mandate is constitutional (see also here). It should by now be obvious that many well-known and highly respected scholars believe otherwise.
I think the notion that the mandate is constitutional is nonsense.
I think the notion that the mandate is constitutional is nonsense.
So is TARP, the Department of Education, Medicaid/Medicare, the 55 MPH National Speed Limit, price controls, the auto bailout, Social Security, the War on Drugs, …
Seriously, we’re defending the “slippery slope” from way down at the bottom of the louge. Some days I think the Libs are quite right to consider us mad for fighting this fight when F.D.R. already won it almost a century ago.
Especially when there are so many examples where Republicans and conservatives (not necessarily the same) are happy to throw the Constitution under the bus when it suits them.
See also,
Wickard v. Filburn
South Dakota v. Dole
Maybe the Brits have it right and are better off without a written Constitution to wrangle over. Since no one (on any side of the political spectrum) seems to care about the Constitution when “really super important matters” are at stake, why have one? To date I think the only Constitutional provision which hasn’t been ignored or bent whenever it was convenient to do so is the 3rd Amendment, precisely because it forbid the government from doing that which no one wanted to do anyway.
They’re not alone. Mark Levin’s Landmark Legal Foundation has also filed a brief in support of the Commonwealth of Virginia’s challenge to Obamacare.
One effect of this administration’s overreach is that people are looking into our history. Nullification and interposition are verging on becoming respectable subjects for debate once again.
Indeed, danae. The “individual mandate” looks like a real loser at this point.