Today was the final day for arguments at the Supreme Court for Obamacare, laughably officially known as the “Affordable Care Act”. But it is the signature strike of Obama and the left at the Constitution, which will literally be a historical document with little contemporary influence if Obamacare is ruled Constitutional.
As Bob Thompson writes at The American Thinker,
this case will determine whether there are any meaningful limitations on Congress’ power to mandate an individual’s life choices.
This should give all of us pause for concern, as states’ power will be forever subsumed under the “statist” power that the federal government will wield if Obamacare is ruled Constitutional. More from Thompson:
When Congress’ power under Article I, Section 8 — power to “regulate commerce … among the several states” (Clause 3) — has been paired with Congress’ power “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into executing the foregoing powers” (Clause 18), the result has been the virtually unlimited power of Congress to dominate the everyday behavior of the American people, in direct conflict with the plain language of the Tenth Amendment reserving such powers to the state and to the people.
A linchpin of the government’s case is a 1942 ruling where interstate commerce was somehow invoked for a farmer who grew wheat for his family and livestock, yet the wheat never left the state:
the government relies heavily on the properly ridiculed 1942 Supreme Court case of Wickard v. Filburn, which upheld a bureaucratic decision dictating the amount of wheat that a farmer grew for his family and his livestock, even though the wheat never traveled in or had any connection to interstate commerce.
Thompson is optimistic that the court will actually look to the Constitution to determine its decision, rather than the bending road of following precedent in case upon case:
In the 2008 case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court re-examined the “prevailing wisdom” that the Second Amendment protected only a “collective right” which protected state Guards, and not a right that individuals enjoyed. After an extensive textual and contextual analysis, the Court reached a decision consistent with the Founders, even if inconsistent with prior Court decisions. In the Antoine Jonescase in January 2012, the Supreme Court re-examined over 40 years of Supreme Court jurisprudence that transformed the Fourth Amendment’s “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects” into a judicially invented right to privacy, and returned the Fourth Amendment to its property foundation. These were brave, principled decisions.
This has been a fascinating case from a legal and constitutional perspective, and the focus on the issues will only help conservatives, because it highlights the issues and educates a huge number of average Americans on what is happening to our great nation.
a. it represents the end of limited government
b. the price tag is ballooning ($1.8 TRILLION), almost double the original projection
c. it’s not going to make us healthier
As conservatives, we will wait patiently but nervously for the Courts decision, but I will also pray for the Court to clearly see the issues and rule appropriately.
Thompson’s entire article is worth your time
