State Supreme Court accepts federal overreaching
Posted by Trent England - December 31, 2009
In America, even those who trample on the Constitution must pretend to revere it, at least in politics. And so as the national government has been gradually--or dramatically--expanded over the last century, politicians and judges have scrupulously crafted alibis to explain why, golly, it turns out gigantic top-down government really was part of our constitutional design.
One of these fibs has grown like a tumor on the Commerce Clause, the enumerated power in Article I, section 8.
"Congress shall have the Power ... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."
This was one of the original reasons for replacing the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution, to facilitate trade among the states and prevent wasteful and dangerous commercial conflicts.
But, says the Supreme Court, isn't everything, at some level, about commerce? And so the Commerce Clause has been used as the reason why the national government can regulate
wages,
wolves, and backyard gardens (whether growing
wheat or
marijuana), to name just a few.
One might think that state governments, even state courts, would resist such federal overreach. All too often that is not the case. Last week, the
Washington State Supreme Court happily embraced the overextended Commerce Clause to hold that the Federal Arbitration Act overlaps with--and preempts--Washington's Condominium Act. The Court decided that selling and warrantying condos is "interstate commerce" because, well, some of the stuff used to build those condos probably came from another state. So much for limited federal power, and so much for states standing up for state authority against federal overreach.
(P.s. I actually think the Washington law is a boon for lawyers and harmful to builders, investors, and the economy. But if Washington State's raison d'
être, at least at times, is simply to serve as a warning to other states ... isn't that what "50 laboratories of democracy" is all about?)
Add Comment -
Jeremy M. said on Dec 31 2009 at 5:59pm
I've ceased to be surprised or amazed. The following verse in Romans 1 has sunk-in and I know get it: "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;"
We're dealing with reprobate minds. Don't expect them to make sense. Fight them, but don't expect them to make sense.
Joe Siegel said on Jan 01 2010 at 6:14pm
The trampling of the Constitution is probably the biggest concern I have these days of the threat to our liberties from the current administration and congressional majority. I view it as a huge lake slowly seeping through a dam. The dam being the Constitution and the lake being, as Friedrich Hayek calls it the arbitrary coercion our elected representatives use to bestow upon society their personal morals and ethics. Please see my recent blog post on this issue. Comments added to the blog con or pro most welcome! http://libertythruknowledge.com
SouthernRoots said on Jan 02 2010 at 12:47pm
Just like the Constitution, the idea of "States" is outdated and old-fashioned.
We are now (and have been for a while) The United States Department of Revenue, Pacific Division, Washington Section".
