Maggie's Farm

readers might want to wade through the USSC's holdings in US v Morrison and US v Lopez. Morrison: violence against women had only an "attenuated" effect on interstate commerce (ISC), federal statute relying on the commerce clause partially invalidated. Lopez: federal statute criminalizing carrying guns on school grounds did not "substantially" effect ISC.

Wickard won't be overturned, the best we can hope for is a better definition of to what extent ISC has to be affected before congress can validly act.

making a strawman out of Wickard only helps the liberals. to defeat the liberal argument for extending the power of congress to regulate everything we need to really understand the underpinnings of their constitutional arguments.

most of the wheat the farmer in Wickard was growing was sold in ISC, and there was no doubt that congress could regulate the amount he could grow. the issue was the amount that the farmer grew that he held off the market for his own personal use. the reasoning of the court was that by using personal surplus, he did not have to buy wheat that was being sold in interstate commerce. presumably the net effect of all farmers doing so would have a substantial effect on ISC.

exactly my point.