A Gun Activist Takes Aim at U.S. Regulatory Power

[GeneCC]

Regarding the 1942 Supreme Court case of Wickard v. Filburn.... Somebody's wrong in their perception of the Founding Fathers' Intent.....


"Coming at the end of a string of similar rulings, the decision wasn't controversial at the time, says Jackson scholar John Barrett, a law professor at St. John's University in New York. It was seen as reflecting the framers intent to create a powerful federal government."

Might be true, at least before the Anti-Federalists got a Bill of Rights added to the original document. Including the Amendment that say that powers not given to Congress belong to the People and the States.

Which would have excluded Wickard vs Filburn if a certain addled Politician hadn't bullied the Court into going along with "the Plan".

Our man Dr/Mr. Barrett is obviously hoping a lot more than he's thinking.

[GeneCC]

Here's what we're going up against... Elena Kagan. She doesn't want to answer the question.... because she probably agrees with the idea of a "power Central Government".



The whole point of Federalism was to allow different States to experiment and optimize laws to fit their local circumstances.

"Jurists" like Ms. Kagan, or many Democrats, need to be reminded of the legend of Procrustes, who would house travelers in his iron bed.

If you were too short he would put you on a rack and stretch you to fit.

If you were too tall for the bed he would slice off some of your legs.

The term "Procrustean Solution" comes from this legend.

"One Size Fits All" doesn't.


I wish our friend Mr. Marbut the best and hope one day to purchase one his rifles, in a somewhat freer America than we have today.