Political Crossfire Forums

Eh. It seems to work alright for us overall. You're wrong about the ICC btw - intended to expand federal power not limit it. National government of enumerated powers only, etc.

Its the framework of the constitution. Powers are left to states unless enumerated. Enumerating the power to regulate commerce gave the national government the power to regulate commerce.

The cases you're citing are discussing the scope of the commerce clause regulatory power granted by the commerce clause to the national government.

There's no monolithic "what the founders wanted". Ambimiguities can be useful for reaching agreements in contracts and that's the case here as well.

It's of course expanded beyond its scope as contemplated by 18th century minds. I'm just pointing out the grant of this enumerated power was not with the design to limit power of the national government. It was intended to impart power.

While it was struck down in Lopez, they barely changed the law and it hasn't been struck down. Sandy Hook, remarkably, was a gun free zone when someone broke the law to murder those children.

One of our biggest problems is we allow our politicians to be bribed. How?? They changed the name of bribery to lobby so they could dupe the public. Seems to be working well since there are no calls to end it. LOL.

How does that relate to the present topic of federalism?

You literally just regurgitate whatever the last headline you saw on Breitbart was, don't you? Lmao it's like a poorly designed machine.