- Joined
- Sep 22, 2005
- Messages
- 11,430
- Reaction score
- 2,282
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Article 1 section 8. "To provide for the defense and general welfare..."
and the following list of specifically enumerated powers is ALL that congress was allowed to do.
Amendment X
right but NONE of these are explicit. They are DERIVED from the constitution. That's my point. Likewise drug control is derived as well.
Well, that's weird.
What the Tenth Amendment really says is that if it's not SPECIFICALLY and EXPLICITLY allowed to the Federal government in the Constitution, that it's SPECIFICALLY and EXPLICITLY NOT allowed.
How you manage to get the opposite meaning is not a good reflection on your training.
There is direct harm (murder, assault) and potential harm (drunk driving). Some consider drugs potential harm.
Ah.
Well, you see...drunk driving is outlawed, not alcohol.
providing for the defense and general welfare is pretty damn openended don't you think?
Not once a person learns how to read, no.
Isn't it possible that protecting the health of citizens be considered "providing for the general welfare"?
Since that wasn't a power given to the Congress, no, it's not.
The Constitution is not a blank check.
Get over it.
Also you should look up something called "strict scrutiny".
Is that something like "learning how to read basic english"?
we aren't discussing the FDA
Where do you think the line of descent for drug interdiction comes from?
If comes from the enabling arguments for the FDA...which, btw, doesn't have any Constitutional standing, either.