• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Commerce Clause discussion

K

KtLaw

New member
Joined
Jan 31, 2020
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I wanted to see if anyone could help me get a better understanding of the commerce clause. In Wickard v. Filburn the supreme court ruled that Filburn growing his own wheat affected the commerce clause. Here are a list of questions I am unclear about when it comes to the commerce clause:

  1. Can the commerce clause be used to control what you can and cannot eat/buy?
  3. Can any building receiving natural gas be considered commerce?
  5. What limits did US v. Lopez really put on the commerce clause?
  7. US v. Jones the supreme court ruled a private dwelling doesn’t count as federal commerce, what if someone in the dwelling received federal aid like food stamps, health care, or low income housing/section 8?
  9. What was the original intent of the commerce when created by the founders?
  11. Did Obama-Care expand the commerce clause with its health care plan?
  13. What really counts as trade within the commerce clause?

I am looking for a variety of different interpretations of the commerce clause followed with a discussion from different viewpoints.
 
KtLaw said:
I wanted to see if anyone could help me get a better understanding of the commerce clause. In Wickard v. Filburn the supreme court ruled that Filburn growing his own wheat affected the commerce clause. Here are a list of questions I am unclear about when it comes to the commerce clause:

  1. Can the commerce clause be used to control what you can and cannot eat/buy?
  3. Can any building receiving natural gas be considered commerce?
  5. What limits did US v. Lopez really put on the commerce clause?
  7. US v. Jones the supreme court ruled a private dwelling doesn’t count as federal commerce, what if someone in the dwelling received federal aid like food stamps, health care, or low income housing/section 8?
  9. What was the original intent of the commerce when created by the founders?
  11. Did Obama-Care expand the commerce clause with its health care plan?
  13. What really counts as trade within the commerce clause?

I am looking for a variety of different interpretations of the commerce clause followed with a discussion from different viewpoints.
Click to expand...

??? commerce clause was meant to promote free trade between states and nations. Our libcommies perverted it to give central govt libcommie control of the economy that our Founders never intended them to have.
 
James972 said:
??? commerce clause was meant to promote free trade between states and nations. Our libcommies perverted it to give central govt libcommie control of the economy that our Founders never intended them to have.
Click to expand...




Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.


Article I | U.S. Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
 
As far as I know the school zones were the only time the courts didn't defer to the gubbermint under the pretense that the commerce clause allowed it.
 
KtLaw said:
I wanted to see if anyone could help me get a better understanding of the commerce clause. In Wickard v. Filburn the supreme court ruled that Filburn growing his own wheat affected the commerce clause. Here are a list of questions I am unclear about when it comes to the commerce clause:

  1. Can the commerce clause be used to control what you can and cannot eat/buy?
  3. Can any building receiving natural gas be considered commerce?
  5. What limits did US v. Lopez really put on the commerce clause?
  7. US v. Jones the supreme court ruled a private dwelling doesn’t count as federal commerce, what if someone in the dwelling received federal aid like food stamps, health care, or low income housing/section 8?
  9. What was the original intent of the commerce when created by the founders?
  11. Did Obama-Care expand the commerce clause with its health care plan?
  13. What really counts as trade within the commerce clause?

I am looking for a variety of different interpretations of the commerce clause followed with a discussion from different viewpoints.
Click to expand...

Do you own homework!:lamo
 
Rich2018 said:
Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.


Article I | U.S. Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
Click to expand...

did you have any idea what your point is????
 
Rich2018 said:
Congress has authority over commerce ?
Click to expand...

you mean they have authority over interstate commerce for the purpose of keeping it free. Do you understand?
 
Rich2018 said:
Nope, international commerce too
Click to expand...

yes regulation of commerce to promote free trade among states and nations only, not communism as liberal would like!!
 
James972 said:
yes regulation of commerce to promote free trade among states and nations only, not communism as liberal would like!!
Click to expand...

The Constitution doesn't prevent a US government from adopting communist policies...
 
Rich2018 said:
The Constitution doesn't prevent a US government from adopting communist policies...
Click to expand...

of course it does it even prevents communists from holding office with oath of office and with enumerated powers and bill of rights
 
James972 said:
of course it does it even prevents communists from holding office with oath of office and with enumerated powers and bill of rights
Click to expand...

Really? Where?

Where in the Constitution does it say that the means of production have to be privately owned for instance ?
 
KtLaw said:
I wanted to see if anyone could help me get a better understanding of the commerce clause. In Wickard v. Filburn the supreme court ruled that Filburn growing his own wheat affected the commerce clause. Here are a list of questions I am unclear about when it comes to the commerce clause:

  1. Can the commerce clause be used to control what you can and cannot eat/buy?
  3. Can any building receiving natural gas be considered commerce?
  5. What limits did US v. Lopez really put on the commerce clause?
  7. US v. Jones the supreme court ruled a private dwelling doesn’t count as federal commerce, what if someone in the dwelling received federal aid like food stamps, health care, or low income housing/section 8?
  9. What was the original intent of the commerce when created by the founders?
  11. Did Obama-Care expand the commerce clause with its health care plan?
  13. What really counts as trade within the commerce clause?

I am looking for a variety of different interpretations of the commerce clause followed with a discussion from different viewpoints.
Click to expand...

It allows congress to enact legislation regulating commerce among the several states.

Are you a state?
 
Rich2018 said:
Really? Where?

Where in the Constitution does it say that the means of production have to be privately owned for instance ?
Click to expand...

enumerated powers don't allow govt to own. OMG you are like a tiny child!!!
 
KtLaw said:
I wanted to see if anyone could help me get a better understanding of the commerce clause. In Wickard v. Filburn the supreme court ruled that Filburn growing his own wheat affected the commerce clause. Here are a list of questions I am unclear about when it comes to the commerce clause:

  1. Can the commerce clause be used to control what you can and cannot eat/buy?
  3. Can any building receiving natural gas be considered commerce?
  5. What limits did US v. Lopez really put on the commerce clause?
  7. US v. Jones the supreme court ruled a private dwelling doesn’t count as federal commerce, what if someone in the dwelling received federal aid like food stamps, health care, or low income housing/section 8?
  9. What was the original intent of the commerce when created by the founders?
  11. Did Obama-Care expand the commerce clause with its health care plan?
  13. What really counts as trade within the commerce clause?

I am looking for a variety of different interpretations of the commerce clause followed with a discussion from different viewpoints.
Click to expand...
Is this a homework assignment?
 
Samwise said:
It allows congress to enact legislation regulating commerce among the several states.

Are you a state?
Click to expand...

yes regulate for the purpose of maintaining free trade among the States. The first 2 convention were called specifically for that purpose!!
 
James972 said:
yes regulate for the purpose of maintaining free trade among the States. The first 2 convention were called specifically for that purpose!!
Click to expand...

So you're a state? Is that what you're saying?
 
KtLaw said:
I am looking for a variety of different interpretations of the commerce clause followed with a discussion from different viewpoints.
Click to expand...

one viewpoint has prevailed ie that libcommie govt can regulate any tiny aspect of commerce it wants . One more supreme court pick and we can begin to put an end to this treason and reinstate capitalism.
 
Rich2018 said:
Really? Where?

Where in the Constitution does it say that the means of production have to be privately owned for instance ?
Click to expand...

Fourth Amendment?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Click to expand...
 
Rich2018 said:
Yes they do !!!!!
Click to expand...

if so tell us where in COnstitution is says a communist govt can control and own the economy??? Funny you forgot to tell us!!
 
James972 said:
if so tell us where in COnstitution is says a communist govt can control and own the economy??? Funny you forgot to tell us!!
Click to expand...

"To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom