Even if the Supreme Court rules Obamacare unconstitutional, that will still leave in place all of the previous 75 years of Supreme Court decisions which have allowed the federal government to expand far beyond its original constitutional limits. In the 1930s, the Supreme Court overturned many New Deal expansions of federal power, only to have them all reversed as Roosevelt appointees eventually filled the Court. A Supreme Court decision against Obamacare must not be a cause for complacency in the war against the ever-expanidng power of the national government, including enacting amendments to restore the original constitutional limits on federal power. . . . → Read More: Obamacare: Winning the Battle but Losing the War?
|
|||||
 Comments are closed  Commentary Current & Constitutional, Restoring the Constitution  Affordable Care, amendment, constitution, EPA, FDR, interstate commerce, Kennedy, New Deal, Obama, Obamacare, Roberts, Scalia, Supreme Court, Thomas, Wickard The American Thinker has published as a blog item my review of President Obama’s so-called regulatory review (You call this regulatory reform?). Under the direction of Professor Cass Sunstein, President Obama’s former University of Chicago law school colleague, all federal regulatory bodies were to eliminate regulations which were unduly burdensome to small businesses. Private sector critics . . . → Read More: The Constitution and Real Federal Regulatory Reform Comments are closed Commentary Current & Constitutional, Economies, Economics and Economies, Restoring the Constitution constitution, federal register, federal regulation, interstate commerce clause, job creation, Obama, regulation, regulatory reform, regulatory relief, regulatory review, small business, Sunstein |
|
||||
|
Copyright © 2024 Timely Renewed - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
Refusal to Defend: The Abuse of Power Underlying the Gay Marriage Cases
By ignoring US and California state officials’ refusal to defend DOMA and Prop 8, the Supreme Court abetted an egregious increase in executive branch power and attack on the rule of law. Now executive branch officials no longer have to constitutionally repeal laws of which they disapprove in the legislature, they only need to fail to defend them when they are challenged in court. . . . → Read More: Refusal to Defend: The Abuse of Power Underlying the Gay Marriage Cases