Rulings on Bono v. Atlasia 2.0 (Part 2)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

While I agree with the majority in their interpretation of the impact of Clauses 4 annd 6 of Article I Section 5 of the Constitution upon the constitutionality of thus Act, I unreservedly disagree with their interpretation of the effect of Article I Section 5 Clause 9.

The assertion that labor is not an item of commerce made by the majority depends upon the mistaken assumption that because of its lack of tangibility it somehow cannot be owned.  There are diverse varieties of intangible property such as patents, corporate shares, and in particular: labor.  The contract between an employee and an employer for the provision of wages and benefits in exchange for labor is clearly a transfer of the employee's labor to the employer who directs and controls what is done with that labor.  Therefore labor is clearly an item of commerce and thus it is within the purview of the Senate under Article I Section 5 Clause 9 to establish minimum standards for that item of commerce.  Setting a minimum economic value for tradable labor is clearly one particular means of establishing such a standard and thus a law setting a minimum wage such as The Fair Wage Act is constitutional.

-- Justice Ernest in dissent.