Quote:
|
The Court has the power to do so. They put the brakes on large portions of the New Deal, and US v Lopez makes for very good precedent.
|
That was before the court packing threats. Since then the court was ceased to recognize the 10th Amendment as any more than a rubber stamp for federal power grabs. For example most federal environmental and labor laws fly in the face of the constitution. So does the nationalization of the banking and auto industry and most federal guns laws. The 10th only allows for the federal government to maintain the free flow of goods between states, not decide what those goods may be and what goods are lawful.
Quote:
|
The Firearms Freedom Act(s) being passed in several states have the potential to push this issue in short order. We may be seeing a major "10th Amendment v. Commerce Clause" death match in the courts in the next couple of years.
|
Those symbolic measures while well meaning and worthy of support are doomed. The courts long ago abandoned any pretense of enforcing any limitation on the powers of the federal government. The only answer with teeth is a realistic threat of a constitutional convention. Anything else will be laughed off by the courts.