Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wayners who wrote (19449)	9/22/2009 9:15:23 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 103300

Re: "gradually change all the legal tests that go with the Commerce clause" That's just the problem I'd argue: there don't seem to BE ANY (rational or defensible) "legal tests" for this new and almost totally unrestrained interpretation of the Commerce Clause. It seems that ANYTHING that can even remotely be tied to 'commerce' of any kind --- whether entirely within one State's borders and never crossing into inter-state commerce or not --- is held to be subject to federal authority. Anything. (So... it might be very difficult to find any 'gradual' way to roll-back that massive expansion of federal power. Likely it's 'all or nothing' and we can't have a piecemeal rollback.)