Title: The Commerce Clause and the concept of limited power [Video] Source:
liveleak.com URL Source:http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=94e_1282845672 Published:Aug 26, 2010 Author:Reason TV; posted by star53 Post Date:2011-06-21 15:38:02 by GreyLmist Keywords:Constitution, Commerce Clause, Originalism Views:54 Comments:3
The heart of this debate is whether we accept that the Constitution exists to limit the power of the federal government. It’s that basic.
I think we all accept and believe and hope that the Constitution exists to limit the power of the federal government, but it is not that basic at all. It appears that making wars for oil as with Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, would fall under the Commerce clause, would it not?
The question remains though, as to whether the Commerce clause gives the POTUS the dictatorial power to declare war without the consent of congress.
The CC certainly wipes the 10th Amendment off the map, doesn't it?
It appears that making wars for oil as with Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, would fall under the Commerce clause, would it not?
I would say, No, it definitely would not. Congress is not empowered to regulate the Commerce of foreign nations by resource-war force, just management- regulations of their trade here by tariffs and such.
The question remains though, as to whether the Commerce clause gives the POTUS the dictatorial power to declare war without the consent of congress.
No, it doesn't do that. The POTUS has no real power at all to declare war, with or without the consent of Congress, and the Commerce Clause only pertains to Congress.
The CC certainly wipes the 10th Amendment off the map, doesn't it?
No, it doesn't do that either. The 10th Amendment, though, can and does override the Commerce Clause when Congress tries to define that clause to mean whatever they want it to mean beyond the scope of their enumerated powers. I'll look around for more sources to clarify this issue.