Obama government will stop defending the DOMA

[bullmoose88]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really?  Fancy that. I wonder how that conclusion was drawn. I wonder how and when this consensus emerged that the commerce clause allows the feds to do anything not otherwise unconstitutional?  Is the consensus also that the SCOTUS decisions striking down federal laws in the past that they considered beyond the scope of the commerce clause were simply wrong?  Can someone help me some more with some of this?  Obviously, I need it. Thanks.

Did Scalia recently approve a law that banned an individual from growing marijuana on his own land, for his own use, under the Commerce Clause?

Yes, there is clear precedent that the activity of producing goods for private use does indeed affect interstate commerce, because the dispensaries (in this case) that sell the stuff will lose business, plus the increased supply of weed will at the margins affect the price of that particular commodity.

The horrors of 1L constitutional law...stupid home garden affecting interstate commerce (tomatoes or potatoes whatnot).

[bullmoose88]

Yes,  if my choosing to never get out of bed in the morning is deemed an act of interstate commerce, because I am not making money to tax, or suing people, increasing the cost of transactions, is deemed to affect interstate commerce, then I guess a law that I have to get out of bed at 6:00 am every morning, and go out into the marketplace to stir things up, would be deemed within the Feds' commerce power.

You know, not having kids affects interstate commerce too. Interesting.

Wouldn't you say that the precedent since say the 1930s would make that interstate commerce, however silly...though recent cases have started to push that line of thinking back (See Lopez).

[bullmoose88]

Yes,  if my choosing to never get out of bed in the morning is deemed an act of interstate commerce, because I am not making money to tax, or suing people, increasing the cost of transactions, is deemed to affect interstate commerce, then I guess a law that I have to get out of bed at 6:00 am every morning, and go out into the marketplace to stir things up, would be deemed within the Feds' commerce power.

You know, not having kids affects interstate commerce too. Interesting.

Wouldn't you say that the precedent since say the 1930s would make that interstate commerce, however silly...though recent cases have started to push that line of thinking back (See Lopez).

No, doing nothing has never been held to be an act of interstate commerce. The null set has not yet become an "act" as it were. Stay tuned.

Fair enough.  Eagerly awaiting whatever you're drawing up here.

[bullmoose88]

But if it makes you feel better, you caused the fire yourself by doing some at-home electrical work, burn yourself up, the hospital takes you in and treats you without knowledge of ability to pay, and it turns out you have none. You're at fault. Well, hospital, go try to collect.

But are you?  Perhaps the equipment you used had a defect.  Or perhaps you have home owners insurance. 

this is fun.

[bullmoose88]

But if it makes you feel better, you caused the fire yourself by doing some at-home electrical work, burn yourself up, the hospital takes you in and treats you without knowledge of ability to pay, and it turns out you have none. You're at fault. Well, hospital, go try to collect.

But are you?  Perhaps the equipment you used had a defect.  Or perhaps you have home owners insurance. 

this is fun.

Ok, your meth lab blew up through documentable human error. You do not have homeowner's insurance.

I think if your meth lab blew up, you have bigger problems than your lack of health and homeowner's coverage.

[bullmoose88]

But if it makes you feel better, you caused the fire yourself by doing some at-home electrical work, burn yourself up, the hospital takes you in and treats you without knowledge of ability to pay, and it turns out you have none. You're at fault. Well, hospital, go try to collect.

But are you?  Perhaps the equipment you used had a defect.  Or perhaps you have home owners insurance. 

this is fun.

So you're implying that human error doesn't exist?

Oh no.  Certainly human error happens...just was amusing myself to point out potential issues with that hypo.

[bullmoose88]

If that is the reason the firm dropped the case, then I must say that is entirely despicable and thuggish behavior, that should be unacceptable and it shouldn't be tolerated from any group of activists regardless of what they support.

Not the firm's fault for lacking the cajones to take up a case concerning some great moral issue eh?

[bullmoose88]

If that is the reason the firm dropped the case, then I must say that is entirely despicable and thuggish behavior, that should be unacceptable and it shouldn't be tolerated from any group of activists regardless of what they support.

Not the firm's fault for lacking the cajones to take up a case concerning some great moral issue eh?

I didn't say that. If I was going to say that, I would have, but of course I didn't so don't be ridiculous.

All the focus is on the bullying...what bullying exactly...the disappointment expressed here should be directed at the firm...which seems to have balked with seemingly little pressure.

[bullmoose88]

Damn that powerful Homosexual Lobby!
If only other minorities like Wall Street bankers and Oil & Gas companies had that much influence.

Nobody is as powerful and as stealthy behind...the scenes as the pink mafia.

[bullmoose88]

Damn that powerful Homosexual Lobby!
If only other minorities like Wall Street bankers and Oil & Gas companies had that much influence.

Nobody is as powerful and as stealthy behind...the scenes as the pink mafia.

Correct, Godfather Bullmoose.

Can you give me a moment...I'm a bit tired from chasing you around these tomato plants.  My left arm hurts...my chest.