MyFoxOrlando

Hello fellow Bloggers!

This is the tenth of eleven installments of:

"How to Be A Real American"

That's right, we are discussing Our Bill of Rights (YOUR RIGHTS!).

So far we've discussed the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, the right to eat Krispy Kreme donuts, and much more. This time we will be discussing amendment ten of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The Tenth Amendment makes explicit the idea that the federal government is limited only to the powers granted in the Constitution, however, this amendment has been bypassed, and states' rights may have been violated.

Per Wikipedia: The Commerce Clause has been cited in many cases that have allowed the federal government to limit what were previously considered rights "reserved to the States respectively or to the people. In Wickard v. Filburn (1942), the Court ruled that federal regulations of wheat production could constitutionally be applied to wheat grown for "home consumption" on a farm--that is, wheat grown to be fed to farm animals or otherwise consumed on the farm. The rationale was that a farmer's growing "his own wheat" can have a substantial cumulative effect on interstate commerce, because if all farmers were to exceed their production quotas, a significant amount of wheat would either not be sold on the market or would be bought from other producers. Hence, in the aggregate, if farmers were allowed to consume their own wheat, it would affect the interstate market in wheat."

So basically the Federal Government is now in charge of anything that can be bought of sold or used because its use will affect interstate commerce.

"Medical marijuana was explicitly made legal under California state law by Proposition 215; however, marijuana is prohibited at the federal level by the Controlled Substances Act. Even though the woman grew the marijuana strictly for her own consumption and never sold any, the Supreme Court stated that growing one's own marijuana affects the interstate market of marijuana, citing the Wickard v. Filburn decision. It therefore ruled that this practice may be regulated by the federal government under the penumbra of the Commerce Clause."

Who but a lawyer would say that with a straight face?

Who else would say that the federal government should overrule state law because, by not selling it, a woman's home garden produce is affecting national weed demand, and therefore, national commerce! Next thing you know, we won't be able to sing karaoke because it affects national record sales! (In my case it could cause a considerable drop in sales.)

Okay, okay, I'm back in my chair. As we have seen, this "Commerce Clause" can be used to give the federal government power over anything that can, or even can't, be sold no matter what the individual state laws say.

What do you think?

Is the federal government abusing states' and individuals' Tenth Amendment rights?

Is the use of a commerce clause a valid action or just a slick way for the federal government to overrule state power?

How will this slippery use of federal law affect all of our other rights "guaranteed" to us in the Bill of Rights?

Northton

Part X of XI: How To Be A Real American

northton

Inside Fox:
About FOX 35 Find it Here Mornings What's on FOX Contests

Write your comment below: Email me when a new comment is added to this entry