James Carville: Cavalry Isn't Coming to Stop Trump
Rachel Maddow Returns Back to Faking News Stories, and There Is a Crisis...
Trump Once Again Deserves the Nobel Peace Prize
Trump Puts the Squeeze on Iran
Can We Shake Welfare Dependency in Time to Avoid Fiscal Collapse?
Skip 'Captain America: Brave New World,' Rewatch 'Clear and Present Danger'
The FTC Must Return to Supporting Startups and Small Business by Challenging Harmful...
The Future of Clean Energy Looks Increasingly Nuclear
Freedom Should Prevail in Sports Betting
DOGE Is Doing What the American People Want
DOGE Could Unleash Our Economy and Restore Constitutional Guardrails
Iranian Democratic Activism Is on the Rise but Can Benefit From the West...
Planned Parenthood Is Sidestepping Democracy and Science to Further an All-Trimester Abort...
Donald Trump's Steadfast Loyaty
Donald Trump's Steadfast Loyalty
Tipsheet

Not Out of the Question

WaPo's Charles Lane concedes that at least one challenge against ObamaCare has some real legal merit: The possibility that the individual mandate is unconstitutional.
Advertisement


Indeed.  It's one thing for Congress to regulate economic activity in which Americans engage, under its Commerce Clause powers.  It's quite another for congressmen to jump into the realm of economic inactivity, telling people that they are legally required to enter into a commercial relationship with a private company.

Sure, as Lane points out, one could argue that the choice not to purchase insurance has "economic ripple effects."  But that's sort of a "butterfly effect" approach to Commerce Clause jurisprudence -- one that, if taken to its logical extreme, would leave no area of our lives immune from government purchasing mandates.

Hey, if a Democrat majority can overrule the will of a majority of American citizens and tell me I have to purchase health insurance, would it be OK for a Republican Congress to do the same sort of (freedom-sapping) thing, and require everyone to buy a gun?  No doubt that if the Court adopts an expansive approach to Commerce Clause powers, there'd be some way to shoehorn in an argument about the "economic ripple effects" that would justify Congress in requiring a gun-toting (or at least gun-owning) citizenry.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement