I am with my fellow constitutional law professors, Glenn (Mr. InstaP himself) and Jonathan Adler on this one: I don’t see a principled constitutional basis for Congress to regulate abortions. It is a matter of state power–for state-by-state legislative consideration–and not within Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.
For a Republican Congress to embrace such an expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause is more than a bit ironic (and unprincipled), especially given Republicans’ more parsimonious view of the Clause during the Obamacare litigation. Why jettison this basic understanding of constitutional structure/federalism merely to score a cheap political victory?
Education, politics, and anything else that catches my attention.
Thursday, May 14, 2015
The Enemy of My Enemy
This post is a conservative attack on Republicans. On what basis do "big government" liberals attack this?
This actually annoying on a couple of levels. I'm pro - choice, but even I will admit that Roe vs. Wade was a constitutionally tenuous attempt to find a reason to allow something which most people at the time felt should be done. But it was not based on the commerce clause, although that may have entered the decision; it was based on the 4th ammendment right to privacy, protection a doctor / patient relationship and the treatment they agreed to. It SHOULD be state to state. But the misuse of the commerce clause is also rampat, notably in the drug trade and education, so that 's bad, too.
ReplyDeleteI question whether "most" people, then or now, view abortion as you imply they do.
ReplyDelete