Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Tuesday, December 14. 2010

Quote of the day

 “This broad definition of the economic activity subject to congressional regulation lacks logical limitation” and is unsupported by previous legal cases around the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.


Fed. Judge Hudson, here

Posted by The News Junkie at 08:51 | Comments (5) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Judge Henry E. Hudson was a G.W. Bush appointment and from his bio, appears to be a strict by the book type.

Interesting bit of trivia - Hudson was the head of the US Marshalls Service during the Ruby Ridge Incident.

Be interesting to see how his reasoning holds up during the Appeals and Supreme Court proceedings.
#1 Tom Francis on 2010-12-14 09:07 (Reply)
We can only hope the Supreme Court sees it that way.
#2 feeblemind on 2010-12-14 09:19 (Reply)
Refreshing to see a judge who has actually read the Constitution.
#3 NJSoldier on 2010-12-14 10:23 (Reply)
Interesting analogy by don Surber:

Can the federal government MAKE you get a haircut?

Can it fine you for not visiting a barber?

To avoid a barber is, by the reasoning of this Congress, to still engage in commerce and therefore within the ennumerated powers of Congress to regulate.

Perhaps SCOTUS will be motivated to go back and reverse some of the New Deal decisions that so expanded the power of government at the expense of the freedom of the citizens.
#4 Whitehall on 2010-12-14 12:08 (Reply)
Cautionary note: Reliably-conservative Carl over at No Oil For Pacifists has read the ruling and is not entirely impressed.
#5 Assistant Village Idiot (Link) on 2010-12-14 21:43 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.