Trump Team Blasts Claims About Campaign Morale
LARRY: The Election Night Live Extravaganza Show
MSNBC's Joe Scarborough Melts Down on Election Day
Exit Polls Results Are In. Here's How Things Are Looking.
There's a Wild Twist to the Georgia Poll Worker Busted for Threatening to...
Kamala Just Had an Embarrassing Moment at DNC HQ
Kamala Harris: I'll Protect Second Amendment While Destroying Second Amendment
Cory Booker Makes a Disturbing Admission About the Men Voting for Kamala Harris
Man With 'Manifesto' Arrested at U.S. Capitol Smelling of Fuel, Carrying Flare Gun
Here's Why Nearly 40,000 Votes Need to Be Recounted in Milwaukee
Here's What Joe Biden Will Be Doing on Election Night
CNN Makes Damning Admission About Trump Voters in Virginia
AOC Gets Ripped Apart for Trying to Link the Temperature to Voting
Ben Shapiro Lays Out 'Worst Case Scenario' Where Trump Wins Election
Election Shenanigans Aplenty in Pennsylvania
Tipsheet

Waiting for the "Pro-Choice" Democrats

Philip Klein writes today about the appalling ObamaCare decision that emanated from Judge Gladys Kesler of the Washington, D.C., federal district court.  Of particular interest was this passage:
Advertisement

As previous Commerce Clause cases have all involved physical activity, as opposed to mental activity, i.e. decision-making, there is little judicial guidance on whether the latter falls within Congress’s power...However, this Court finds the distinction, which Plaintiffs rely on heavily, to be of little significance. It is pure semantics to argue that an individual who makes a choice to forgo health insurance is not “acting,” especially given the serious economic and health-related consequences to every individual of that choice. Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something. They are two sides of the same coin. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.

In other words, Judge Kesler argues that citizens' every "mental activity" that involves making choices -- especially those with serious "economic and health-related consequences" -- represent "acts" that can be regulated by the federal government.

This is, literally, quite frightening stuff, a big step on the road to government tyranny. By Judge Kesler's reasoning, in theory, presumably the government could force everyone to eat broccoli, or to buy a gun for protection.  Taking the reasoning to its logical (far) extreme, government could presumably even require every pregnant woman to have an abortion -- especially if, for example, it could be shown that overpopulation was having serious "economic and health-related consequences."  
Advertisement

When a government asserts the right to regulate not just "physical activity" but also "mental activity," people are no longer free.

So where are the "pro-choice" Democrats, when pro-Obama judges want to take away  people's choices to make decisions about their own health care?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement