I see you still have not addressed THIS POST. Are you finally admitting that an essential part of determining the true meaning of our Constitution is reviewing the historical debates during which time our Constitution was framed and ratified?
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law , 1858.
When dealing with people who love Arbitrary government simple facts like there’s no enumerated power for OSHA to begin with just doesn’t matter to them.
Like the early so-called “progressives” they believe in a form of government more like that of the first French Republic, where the departments of governance are broadly defined and the means to achieve those ends are entirely left to politics, where the only sense that there are limits to government power at all is if something is unfashionable for the moment.
Things that may affect commerce among the several States but which are not commerce among the several States are STILL not commerce among the several States.
No power is given to regulate things which only affect commerce.
Moreover, the actual purpose of the Commerce clause was to give Congress the ability to restrain the States from abusing their own Powers to create barriers to others in other States to the advantage of their own citizens … NOT to allow Congress to tell private Persons or privately held entities what they can or cannot do when they engage in commerce.
the cc definately covers the creation of osha, the scope of its authority is doubtful. te current scope of the federal governments use of authority under the cc goes well beyond any measure of authority it imparts. the expansive view of the cc started under fdr would never have been possible but for one thing… the 17th, which allows the federal government to encroach on states authorities unchecked. how far will we let it go?
There you go again, making stuff up and now making a false accusation about me. The truth is, I pointed out the 6th Circuit wants to apply the Humpty Dumpty theory of language to Congress’s power to regulate commerce IN THIS POST
Will you stop making stuff up and making false accusations?
JWK
Our socialist revolutionaries are known for accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of.
What does your post and documentation have to do with the Constitutionality of OSHA threatening business owners within the various state borders with a fine for not compelling their employees to be injected with a foreign substance?
Seems to me OSHA is displaying the very elements of tyranny as summarized by Madison:
.
”The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands [OSHA] . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47
.
JWK
The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
And here we are today, two members on the 6th Circuit pretending Congress’ power to regulate commerce among the States grants a sweeping authority to our federal government to enter the States and threaten business owners therein, under penalty of a fine, to force their employees to be injected with a foreign substance.
So, once again you are proven to be making false accusations.
In fact, the two members on the 6th Circuit panel are using the Humpty-Dumpty theory of language to advance a meaning of “regulating commerce” which is nowhere to be found in the historical debates during which time our Constitution was being framed and ratified, and they are doing so to subjugate our written constitution and to be “master-that’s all”:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”
Stop making crap up and making false accusations about me.
JWK
”Agriculture and manufacturing involve the production of goods; commerce encompasses traffic in such articles.” See: U.S. vs. Lopez, 1995
You really need to apologize for making false accusations about me!
As to the two judges on the 6th circuit, the irrefutable fact is, what they are promoting is a personal opinion concerning the meaning of “regulate commerce” which is unsupported by the historical debates during which time our Constitution was being framed and ratified, and so, their ruling borders on malfeasance and misfeasance. In addition, each of them violated their oath to support and defend “this Constitution”. So, I have no reason to apologize to two judges who are using their office of public trust to impose their personal opinions as the rule of law rather than abide by the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law , 1858.
