Article Image
News Link • Constitution

If They Can Force Us To Buy 'Health Care' …

• http://lewrockwell.com, by Eric Peters
 

This is written as the Supreme Court is weighing the constitutionality of ObamaCare – in particular, it is considering whether the federal government has the authority under the Constitution to force people at gunpoint to buy a health insurance policy from a private, for-profit business. That this is even being discussed – as opposed to dismissed out of hand – tells us just how far down the slippery slope we’ve already slid. But what most people – especially people who support the mandate – may not have considered is where the precedent about to be established will take us. becomes practice.

1 Comments in Response to

Comment by Dennis Treybil
Entered on:

 In the main article, the author expresses a deep concern about "precedent'.  His concern is well-founded.

However, consider the "supremacy clause" Article VI clause 2:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Note that the Constitution itself, laws, and treaties are the supreme law.

Elsewhere (more than once) I've mentioned that neither court rulings nor executive orders were on that list.

Precedent is another item not on that list.

I recognize this is, as the author said, practiced

Consider Article I section 1:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

and Article III section 1:

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

According to Article VI clause 2 previously cited, the enactments of the former are the supreme law of the land - a status not extended to enactments of the latter.

Clearly, the practice of treating the latter as the supreme law of the land violates separation of powers.  Since Congress is (and the people it represents are) the agrieved party(ies), it is up to one or the other or both to seek remedy.  The Constitution provides more than one option.

Congress' failure to act may have been explained by Lindsey Williams in his recent gig with Earnest on Declare Your Independence. 

So that leaves it up to WTP.  What's our excuse?!  What are "our" options?

DC Treybil

 

 

 

 

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, ; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.


Join us on our Social Networks:

 

Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network:


GoldMoney