Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Bernie Sanders Calls for Worker-Ownership of Means of Production
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NotreDame" data-source="post: 74002122" data-attributes="member: 212558"><p>You’ve misread U.S. v Darby. The Court didn’t hold worker wages constituted as commerce. You’ve also misread Gonzales v Raich. </p><p></p><p>But invoking Court decisions that, arguendo, make up the meaning doesn’t refute my point.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks for your irrelevant guessing as to what you “think” I’m doing. Better to adhere to the subject matter and abstain from telling me what you “think” about me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps, but conversely, it isn’t “hard to see” how SCOTUS can refuse to stretch the commerce clause to cover Bernie’s proposal, realizing that’s too far, there must be some limit to this power, and the prior cases having not gone to this extent, can be limited to not extend to Bernie’s proposal. </p><p></p><p>The Roberts’ Court limited the reach of the commerce clause to mandate the purchase of health insurance, despite an existing legal framework to arguably justify the mandate under the commerce clause, and may do so again in regards to Bernie’s proposal.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotreDame, post: 74002122, member: 212558"] You’ve misread U.S. v Darby. The Court didn’t hold worker wages constituted as commerce. You’ve also misread Gonzales v Raich. But invoking Court decisions that, arguendo, make up the meaning doesn’t refute my point. Thanks for your irrelevant guessing as to what you “think” I’m doing. Better to adhere to the subject matter and abstain from telling me what you “think” about me. Perhaps, but conversely, it isn’t “hard to see” how SCOTUS can refuse to stretch the commerce clause to cover Bernie’s proposal, realizing that’s too far, there must be some limit to this power, and the prior cases having not gone to this extent, can be limited to not extend to Bernie’s proposal. The Roberts’ Court limited the reach of the commerce clause to mandate the purchase of health insurance, despite an existing legal framework to arguably justify the mandate under the commerce clause, and may do so again in regards to Bernie’s proposal. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Bernie Sanders Calls for Worker-Ownership of Means of Production
Top
Bottom