Trump Team Blasts Claims About Campaign Morale
MSNBC's Joe Scarborough Melts Down on Election Day
Biden-Harris Administration Wants Your Doctor to Quiz You Even More on Gun Ownership
Alsobrooks Defeats Hogan in Maryland Senate Race
Big Win: Trump Takes North Carolina
Incumbent Democrat Tim Kaine Projected Winner of VA Senate Race
'Wow!': Jake Tapper Left Speechless by Influx of Georgia Independent Voters for Trump
Republican Victory: The First Senate Seat Has Been Flipped
Russia Blamed for Election Day Bomb Threats
Voters in PA Refuse to Tell MSNBC Who They're Voting For
Obama Joins His Fellow Democrats in This Warning About Election Results
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
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