There really isn't anything else to know.

A man empowered by a law that gave him the right to take the law into his own hands, did.


Trayvon Martin was going about his business. He was nearly home when he was faced with a man stalking him. When confronted with that reality he fought in self defense and lost.


He was shot maliciously by a man that wasn't going to let "The fucking coon get away with it." 


There isn't anything else to know. 


Trayvon did nothing wrong except defend himself against a stranger with a gun. The law in Florida stands in the way of justice. 


There sincerely isn't anything else to know.

Actions speak louder than words. What was Trayvon suppose to do draw his Skittle and Arizona Iced Tea on Zimmerman?

'''"It's my understanding that Trayvon Martin got on top of him and just started beating him," the 64-year-old Robert Zimmerman said....


Ya think?


I bet even Zimmerman at this point knows the folly of gun ownership.

Low participation at Iraq Summit of the Arab League

...The absence of five Gulf Arab leaders (click title to entry - thank you) reflects increased Sunni-Shia tensions across the region in the aftermath of last year's Arab Spring uprisings, particularly the one against a regime dominated by a Shiite offshoot sect in Sunni-majority Syria and another by majority Shiites in Sunni-ruled Bahrain, also a Gulf Arab nation.

Qatar's Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassem Bin Jabr Al Thani, also the country's foreign minister, told Al-Jazeera late Wednesday that his own nation's low level of representation was a "message" to Iraq's majority Shiites to stop what he called the marginalization of minority Sunnis.

Majority Shiites have dominated Iraq since the 2003 ouster of Saddam Hussein, a Sunni. The nation's once powerful Sunnis complain that the Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is concentrating power in the hands of the Shiites. There is a growing desire by Sunni-majority provinces to win autonomy as a way to escape Shiite domination....

While bombs went off in Iraq during the summit, the foreign minister of Saudi Arabia was kidnapped in Yemen. So much for good will.

JEDDAH: The Foreign Ministry (click here) yesterday warned the armed group which kidnapped Saudi diplomat Abdullah bin Muhammad Al-Khalidi in front of his house in Aden, Yemen.

Saudi Arabia's deputy consul Abdullah Al-Khalidi, was seized in Mansoora district of Aden as he was about to enter his car.

A ministry source said the group would be held responsible for the captive’s safety and demanded his immediate release.

“The kidnappers will achieve nothing out of this act,” the official said, adding that the Kingdom would take all necessary measures to protect its diplomats and employees.

Saudi Ambassador in Sanaa Ali Al-Hamdan said: "Some signs of a fight were visible in the car owned by the kidnapped diplomat, who apparently showed resistance."...

How does oil in South Sudan turn into hate for Israel?

Blast in Baghdad as Arab summit opens (click here)

Published: 16:15 March 29, 2012

AFP

A blast rocked central Baghdad near the Iranian embassy on the outskirts of the Iraqi capital's heavily-fortified Green Zone as a landmark Arab summit opened Thursday

Baghdad: A blast rocked central Baghdad near the Iranian embassy on the outskirts of the Iraqi capital's heavily-fortified Green Zone as a landmark Arab summit opened Thursday, an AFP journalist said.

"It was a mortar round that landed near the (Iranian) embassy. There are no casualties," though some of the windows of the embassy were broken, a police official said.

The blast was heard at around 1:40 pm (1040 GMT) and took place in the Salhiyeh neighbourhood of central Baghdad. As smoke billowed into the sky, security forces members, military vehicles and firefighters were seen heading to the site of the blast....

BEIRUT: President Michel Sleiman (click here) expressed Thursday support for efforts to secure a political solution in Syria and reiterated Lebanon’s policy of dissociating itself from developments in its neighbor.

“We reiterate ... our hopes that the tireless efforts and [U.N.-Arab envoy] Kofi Anan reach an agreed political solution to the Syria crisis based on the core of the Arab [League] initiative which would allow for a cessation of all forms of hostilities, and implementation of reforms and a transition to democracy sought for by the Syrians that would restore Syria’s stability, position and role,” Sleiman said during the 23rd round of the Arab Summit in Baghdad....

Is there any chance there is a memo or letter or some kind of communication sent by the State of Florida...

...to communities throughout the state with orders to contact the state authorities with every killing after these laws were enacted? In other words, 'the game has changed, etc..'


And I meant to write this a couple of days ago when I first saw it.


I congratulate those surrounding the Martin family for protecting the image of Trayvon and his family. I find this very smart and a good idea. His memory and how it is used is best handled by his family. There are people that would exploit this as an opportunity and it would be wrong to allow that to happen.


Updated: 9:38 AM Mar 27, 2012

Trayvon Martin's Mother Files Trademark Papers (click here)

The mother of slain Florida teenager Trayvon Martin has filed papers seeking to trademark two slogans based on his name.

Posted: 7:40 AM Mar 27, 2012
Reporter: Associated Press 

It really appears to be the law that is the problem.

A nine millimeter without an exit wound.


Wow.


Sternum, flattened tip, soft tissue and logged in vertebrae is the best I can come up with. If the bullet was misshaped enough as it passed through the sternum it would be slowed, done a greater amount of damage to the internal organs. The heart is a thick muscle, especially on a young man. Then would have logged in the vertebrae which is a fairly stout bone. That is incredible a nine millimeter at close range wouldn't have an exit wound, UNLESS, it wasn't all that close.

A Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm pistol, the same model used by George Zimmerman in the shooting of Florida teen Trayvon Martin.

It is somewhat a hopeful sign the police were trying to carry out the law. I sincerely believe the new laws in Florida are the problem. Cities don't want to be sued. They would defer to the state officials if they were told there were no grounds.


The tape shows several police officers in control of their circumstances and I am not surprised it has a more relaxed appearance. Whether or not any of the clothing evidence was compromised is not for me to say. They didn't take the killing lightly. I wonder if there was any kind of effort to keep him alive at the scene.


I am sure the more extensive investigation will reveal what happened and what is completely wrong here. I also believe if the community did nothing there would still be nothing done.

Germane or Coercive

That was the question in regard to the Medicaid provision of the Affordable Care Act.


I think it was Justice Ginsburg that repeatedly noted to all in the courtroom the discretion of the Secretary of Health and Human Services according to the Administrative Procedures Act was what came to bear in this part of the act. It sounded right to me.


Clement wants the Justices to define what coercive was with this law because the capacity the Secretary has is to withhold 100% of the Medicaid matching funds if here is no compliance with 133% of the poverty level.


The relief to the law for the Secretary to rely on is a person 100% of the poverty line and above can obtain insurance through the exchanges. Whether that is realistic or not is another question for the Secretary to answer before the policies in this portion of the law is administered to the states.

Clement


The State Exchanges can stand for each state if there was a defeat of the individual mandate. Keeping the aspects of the law will inspire states to move to enact their own individual mandate if that solves the problems of the health insurance companies.


No powers are removed from Congress. 


Corn husker kickback if severable does not nullify the entire law. Scalia


Why make Congress do everything all over again? Salvage rather than wrecking job which Clement is requesting - Ginsburg

UNITED STATES V. BOOKER (04-104) 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (click here)
No. 04—104, 375 F.3d 508, affirmed and remanded; and No. 04—105, vacated and remanded.


Buckley v. Valeo (No. 75-436) (click here)No. 75-36, 171 U.S.App.D.C. 172, 519 F.2d 821, affirmed in part and reversed in part; No. 75-437, 401 F.Supp. 1235, affirmed


Kneedler


Scalia states the taxpayer has no standing to challenge. No kidding.


Ginsburg states Congress has standing. Exactly and this bill was passed in entirety when health care was the focus of an election. Does the political will of the people mean anything in an election or does everyone in the USA fall to the damages of the minority when they seek to destroy priorities of the people?


The minority in the Senate and House at this time are well known to be favored to the Plutocracy of the USA. Either the will of the people in which it manifests through elected members matter?


Scalia states Congress processes will have to reconsider this law regardless of the decisions of the court. 


Kennedy - Judicial restraint vs. Judicial power


Sotomayor - Move beyond the power issue and into discretion, "What should guide the court discretion?"


Scalia declares he does not have to read the entire law due to the Eight Amendment. Joke. The 8th Amendment prevents cruel and unusual punishment.


Kneedler - A matter of statutory interpretation.


Kneedler - Minimum services provision is the heart of the law.


Alito - "The Economist" - $350 billion over 10 years 


Roberts - If Medicaid Expansion is struck down the rest of the law could stand on its own.


Kennedy - Does the court have the right to impose risk on insurance industry? If we lack the competence to determine risk then the law is inseparable.


Scalia states Booker did not excise the heart of the legislation.


Kneedler - It is a huge act with many provisions and there are many titles do not carry an impact on market pressures.


Kennedy - Severability is difficult when opinion is applied to the peripheral issues.


Printz v. United States (1997) (click here)

...“The Framers explicitly chose a Constitution that confers upon Congress the power to regulate individuals, not States.” Finally, although it is the President's job under the Constitution to oversee execution of federal laws, “The Brady Act effectively transfers this responsibility to thousands of CLEOs in the 50 States, who are left to implement the program without meaningful Presidential control….”

In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens argued that the majority opinion misinterpreted Congress's power under the Constitution. Congress may not usurp the powers that the Constitution reserves to the States, but when it exercises its legitimate constitutional powers, its actions are binding on the States, and State officials must obey congressional instructions....

The interpretations of the court will go on forever and the legislative powers of Congress through elections of the people will be subject to a judges interpretation of the USA Constitution. If there is anything understood about the Robert's Court in majority to date is they act on political ideology and not sound interpretation of the US Constitution, ie: "Citizens United." 

Kneedler pointed to the fact there are provisions that will provide better affordability independent of the individual mandate. Roberts and Scalia were annoyed they would have to review the entire law in order to determine that and protested to that reality.

Farr


Kagan reiterates the fact if there are only the less healthy the cost would be irresponsible and the design of the law is to include all citizens to balance the health of the nation.


Scalia states there is no unsustainable portion of federal subsidies. In other words, the subsidies in the law will not bankrupt the federal government.


Farr "essential" in the Commerce Clause is different than the use of "essential" in the ACA law.  According to Farr "essential" in the ACA is colloquial. 


Justice Scalia asks for clarification of "essential" from a dictionary given everyone is reading the same English in the law.


Farr is looking to Lopez for his 'sculptured' definition of 'essential.'

United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 115 S. Ct. 1624, 131 L. Ed. 2d 626 (1995).(click here)

Facts

The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (GFSZA) made it unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that he knew or had reasonable cause to believe was a school zone. Alfonso Lopez, Jr. (D), a 12th-grade student, carried a concealed and loaded handgun into his high school and was arrested and charged under Texas law with firearm possession on school premises. The next day, the state charges were dismissed after federal agents charged Lopez with violating the Act.

Sotomayor states Farr is ignoring the 'findings' of the law to support it. The law states there would be a death spiral without a community rating. There can't be minimum coverage without a 'community rating.' 


Kennedy and Sotomayor clarifies with Farr the Court should not state there is going to be a death spiral without the community rating.


Farr the "correct question" is "Does Congress want to go back to the old system rather than risk separation of community rating and minimum coverage. That seems ridiculous to me because minimum coverage is a humane standard, so why would a community rating be needed for minimum coverage if it is the right thing to do? Minimum coverage is being treated as a burden by Farr if there is no community rating. That is nonsense. What exactly then is a subscriber paying for and does any company provide essential services to any subscriber in the USA and what makes any company/cartel believe they can sculpture their own idea of what health insurance should be and leave the entire USA populous without ADEQUATE coverage for detection of disease at an early stage? 


It seems to me the 'severability' is a matter of 'scupting' by Farr and therefore the Plaintiffs of this case.


Scalia calls Farr on the carpet to removing the democratic process within Congress if the minimum coverage was removed to leave everything else. Scalia states if the heart of the law is defeated the remainder does not stand. Farr disagrees.


Farr states there would be plenty of reasons to bring young people into the coverage offered. In other words, the statue that supports the priorities of the insurance companies should stand except for individual mandate and minimum coverage. But, it is the opinion of Farr's clients they have omnipotent power to bring in people of a younger age through market attraction. 


Clement


Guaranteed Issue and Community Rating is inseparable and both have to be struck down together. If the Individual Mandate is unconstitutional then the entire law has to fall. That opinion is one held by Scalia as he doesn't believe he should have to be burdened with a heavy workload in regard to the law.


In interview Mr. Clement believes this legislation is coercive. He also assumes this problem will be addressed again by Congress. The Clinton White House did not address the problem again after it was defeated in a vote coerced by the health care industry.


I would not trust a Republicans legislature with health care law.


If there has to be a word assigned to the Plaintiffs, it is arrogant.


end

The cost of America's gun addiction

The gun reference collection at Washington DC's metropolitan police department. Photograph: Jacquelyn Martin/AP


In a country with 283m firearms, we should not be shocked that 33 people are shot dead each day. We should be outraged.


Jenny Price
Tuesday 29 September 2009 08.30 EDT

...Every year, 12,000 people are shot to death in the US – accounting for more than two out of every three killings. That's an average of 33 people daily.

An additional 240 people get shot and injured every day, and more than 65 million Americans own a total of 283m firearms. Where, exactly, do we expect the 12,000 homicides to happen? Do we really think that the places with gangs and high crime rates are the only places where people are going to use their guns?...

The Hoodie has appeared on capital steps before. It was never met with disrespect either.

When Representative Bobby Rush wore a hoodie on to the House floor it was in respect of a dead member of our society. His life was wrongly taken by laws passed within this land. There is absolutely no broad spectrum reason for guns in our society, unless, we continue to allow the NRA to dictate our outcomes.


The use of a hoodie on House floor by Rep. Bobby Rush is the equivalent of poster. It was a demonstration of the power of perception.

Representative Bobby Rush, Ist district of Illinois

Representative Rush revealed a hoodie today from under his suit jacket on the floor of the House. It was a demonstration clearly devoted to the wrongful death of Trayvon Martin. 


Rep. Rush is a hero. He prayed on the House floor for the young man's family and for his soul.


The House Speaker sought to deter the demonstration without success.

Oil Lobbyists pull out all the stops.

There should not be any incentives for the petroleum industry to exploit the carbon fuels market. With large subsidies all 'market' incentives are gone. The subsidies are for the purpose of filling in the gap between profit and cost. It is safe to say the petroleum industry has grown beyond a need for any artificial incentives.


The USA needs incentives, subsidies for alternatives fuels to bring losses for start up markets into alignment with other established markets. These are the most immoral subsidies the USA has ever engaged in with a longevity during the entire petroleum market. This industry is well established and does not need subsidies. This is ridiculous already. These monies are better spent elsewhere, INCLUDING, the USA Debt which would be served with $41 billion in 10 years with the elimination of the oil payoffs.


Currently, the petroleum industry is overfilling their coffers with USA oil that is exported. There is no reason for USA oil to be exported, it should be used to bring down the prices at the gas pump, but, that is not the way it is being used. USA oil, the most intense market on the planet, is entering the global market and exported. There is no prudent protections for future generations to have such natural resources available. High commodity prices and the greed of pumping, while receiving incentives to do exactly that, is counter to our national security. 

Oil industry launches full-court press against Senate bill repealing tax breaks

By Andrew Restuccia

03/26/12 10:35 AM ET

The oil industry launched a full-court press Monday in opposition to Democrat-backed legislation that would repeal billions in tax breaks for the largest oil companies.

The American Petroleum Institute (API), the powerful oil industry trade group, is running an eight-state radio and print advertising campaign opposing efforts to eliminate the tax breaks....

Race Baiting is well contextualized in the Huffington Post in a strategy by National Organization of Marriage

The Right Wing Media wants to speak of the advocacy for justice in the Trayvon Martin case as race baiting. One of the errors of allowing 'loose language' in discussions by the same media is the deliberate misunderstanding of the definition of the words used. Race baiting sounds like a loose and fast way of dividing people based on race. That is not accurate. Race baiting by definition is the making of verbal attacks against members of a racial group.


In the Trayvon Martin case, the plea for justice has cut across racial lines with the discovery of very dangerous laws named, "Stand Your Ground" and "The Castle Doctrine." Trayvon is a black young man who was interrupted in his life by a man with a gun who believed he had the right to kill him after stalking him while police specifically ordered him not to do so.


What has also come to the forefront of the discussion is a social paradigm called, "The Black Male Code." What has come out of that sincere understanding by black men, is an underlying bias within our society against black men of all ages based on hatred and 'genetic violence.' No person is exposed to a violent nature because they are genetically predisposed by skin color. Yet, Black Parents of both gender state their are strategies to prevent false arrest and false identity such as carrying ID at all times in preparation of those very moments. That is a serious infraction of an American social underpinning known as personal safety and security. How can a black person of any age ever be received in the best light possible if there is an underlying bias robbing of that dignity. For an entire populous of the USA to have strategies to protect their youth against authoritarian bias (racial profiling) is a serious paradigm within that society to address. I am grateful this discussion is going forward.


In my opinion, racial profiling happens due to bias instilled by media. There is also the question, and it cannot be ignored considering the profound high number of jailed black people, has racial profiling imposed a quality of life that PRODUCES criminals. 


There is no race baiting in the Trayvon Martin case, there is however an intolerance to let loose guns and loose bias to continue.


Last night the Human Rights Campaign released a slew of previously sealed internal documents from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), the nation's largest, most visible, and most insidious group of marriage discrimination proponents. The documents, marked "confidential," were unsealed yesterday afternoon in Maine as part of that state's ongoing ethics investigation into NOM's campaign finances. NOM, notoriously dogged in its efforts to fight internal disclosures of any kind, had sued in state court to block the investigation, and now we know why: the documents disclosed yesterday reveal the group's vile and repugnant strategy of setting minority groups against each other through the shameful exploitation of race.


Here's how NOM plans to set the Latino and LGBT communities against each other, from page 17 of a "confidential" 2009 strategic report entitled National Strategy for Winning the Marriage Battle:


[B]y searching for these leaders across national boundaries we will assemble a community of next generation Latino leaders that Hispanics and other next generation elites in this country can aspire to be like. (As "ethnic rebels" such spokespeople will also have an appeal across racial lines, especially to young urbans in America). ... [W]e will develop Spanish language radio and TV ads, as well as pamphlets, YouTube videos, and church handouts and popular songs.Our ultimate goal is to make opposition to gay marriage an identity marker, a badge of youth rebellion to conformist association to the bad side of "Anglo" culture.


And from a 2009 report to its board of directors, also marked "confidential":


The Latino vote in America is a key swing vote, and will be so even more so in the future, both because of demographic growth and inherent uncertainty: Will the process of assimilation to the dominant Anglo culture lead Hispanics to abandon traditional family values? We must interrupt this process of assimilation by making support for marriage a key badge of Latino identity -- a symbol of resistance to inappropriate assimilation.


In that board update, NOM is just as candid about its attempts to divide LGBT and African Americans:


The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks -- two key Democratic constituencies. Find, equip, energize and connect African American spokespeople for marriage; develop a media campaign around their objections to gay marriage as a civil right; provoke the gay marriage base into responding by denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots. No politician wants to take up and push an issue that splits the base of his party. Fanning the hostility raised in the wake of Prop 8 is key to raising the costs of pushing gay marriage to its advocates ... find attractive young black Democrats to challenge white gay marriage advocates electorally.


The name of the "strategic project" to which the above passage refers? NOM's "Not a Civil Right Project." Just last week I wrote a column for The Huffington Post in which I said that the movement for LGBT rights and the movement for African-American rights are both part of the same civil rights movement, and that it is crucially important for us to continue asserting so....

I am not impressed.

Burial Insurance is called Life Insurance.


SSI provides $255.00 at the death of a citizen.


Is the best they can come up with to oppose this law? Seriously.


They don't have any, none at all, case law to oppose this, even if it is a shadow of implication? Nothing, huh? Wow.


Commerce of any commodity of any product is not identical to any other commodity simply because it is a commodity. The reference to cars is not a viable argument because when people purchase cars they have exclusive rights to the use of that car. When people purchase health insurance they are absorbing the costs of those uninsured even though the uninsured is not using their health insurance. It is a NOT, ABSOLUTELY NOT, a viable analogy.


I am not impressed.


In purchasing a car, if there are less purchasers the price goes down to attract those fewer buyers. In health insurance if there are fewer purchasers the price goes up because the burden of the pay-out is carried by fewer people. There is no analogy.


This is like a side show and not a legal hearing based in fact. 


Lockner v. New York (click here)

Summary of Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45, 25 S. Ct. 539, 49 L. Ed. 937 (1905).

Facts (click here)

The Bakeshop Act was a New York state labor law which prohibited bakery employees from working for more than sixty hours per week or ten hours per day. Lochner permitted an employee to work in his bakery for more than sixty hours in one week and was convicted of his second offense and fined. Lochner appealed his conviction on the grounds that the law violated his freedom to contract under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

307 U.S. 533 (59 S.Ct. 993, 83 L.Ed. 1446) (click here)

UNITED STATES v. ROCK ROYAL CO-OP, Inc., et al. NOYES, Com'r of Agriculture and Markets of New York v. SAME. DAIRYMEN'S LEAGUE CO-OP. ASS'N, Inc., v. SAME. METROPOLITAN CO-OP. MILK PRODUCERS BARGAINING AGENCY, Inc., v. SAME.

US v. Rock Royal Co-Op speaks to Commodity Price Fixing (click here)

Scalia and Roberts embark in arguing about the future beyond the law itself. I didn't know they had a crystal ball. I can't believe there are Supreme Court Justices is worried about the degrees this law will be manipulated once everyone is in the market. That is a different lawsuit. What seems to be said is that once everyone is insured they will be exploited in other manners. That isn't this law and there is no mention of the future. The only 'future' noted in the Affordable Care Act are the boards, including members of citizens, that will collect information. There is no dictate to the use of that information.

I  can't believe they are playing with semantics between penalty and tax. The penalty is indeed a penalty. Either a person enrolls with a health insurance policy. It is collected as a tax on the IRS forms because it is a method of revenue collection by the USA. The revenue collected is real for those not subscribing to health insurance. So, it is a taxing principle with a purpose. It is legitimate and if it is called a penalty and written on the tax form as a penalty. It is revenue. Why do the semantics even play into this? It is revenue, undefined revenue year to year based on behaviors of Americans.

CLEMENTE, CARBON

Emergency room visits do not solve the problems of the uninsured; to even consider that as a viable option is hideous. People die under that dynamic. It is crude, cruel and demeaning.

Ginsburg is correct. Social Security is a delayed gratification recognized by law that everyone has to participate in order to provide the benefit. It is a lifetime responsibility for every American. Social Security Insurance is even more 'distant' from any health insurance because the benefit from being a member of a health insurance exchange can be provided now and not at a later age.

Summary of McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 4 Wheat. 316, 4 L. Ed. 579 (1819). (click here)

Facts

Maryland (P) enacted a statute imposing a tax on all banks operating in Maryland not chartered by the state. The statute provided that all such banks were prohibited from issuing bank notes except upon stamped paper issued by the state. The statute set forth the fees to be paid for the paper and established penalties for violations.

The Second Bank of the United States was established pursuant to an 1816 act of Congress. McCulloch (D), the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the Bank of the United States, issued bank notes without complying with the Maryland law. Maryland sued McCulloch for failing to pay the taxes due under the Maryland statute and McCulloch contested the constitutionality of that act. The state court found for Maryland and McCulloch appealed.

Summary of Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, 63 S. Ct. 82, 87 L. Ed. 122 (1942). (click here)

Facts

The Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1938 (AAA) set quotas on the amount of wheat put into interstate commerce and established penalties for overproduction. The goal of the Act was to stabilize the market price of wheat by preventing shortages or surpluses. Filburn (P) sold part of his wheat crop and used the rest for his own consumption. The amount of wheat Filburn produced for his own consumption combined with the amount he sold exceeded the amount he was permitted to produce.

Secretary of Agriculture Wickard (D) assessed a penalty against him. Filburn refused to pay, contending that the Act sought to limit local commercial activity and therefore was unconstitutional because it exceeded the scope of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause.

Filburn brought this lawsuit seeking to enjoin enforcement of the Act and a declaratory judgment that the wheat marketing provisions of the AAA were unconstitutional for exceeding the scope of Congress’s commerce power. The court below, a district court panel of three judges, entered judgment for Filburn and the Supreme Court granted cert.

Federalist paper no.45 (click here)

by Alexander Hamilton and John Jay and James Madison

Analysis

Having established in previous papers the necessity of giving the national government all the powers described in the Constitution, Madison now seeks to reassure his audience that such a powerful general government will not threaten the remaining authority of the state governments and render them wholly subservient. This paper is further evidence of how suspicious the American people were of the proposed national government....

United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 115 S. Ct. 1624, 131 L. Ed. 2d 626 (1995). (click here)

Facts

The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (GFSZA) made it unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that he knew or had reasonable cause to believe was a school zone. Alfonso Lopez, Jr. (D), a 12th-grade student, carried a concealed and loaded handgun into his high school and was arrested and charged under Texas law with firearm possession on school premises. The next day, the state charges were dismissed after federal agents charged Lopez with violating the Act....

Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) (click here)

---

Historical Background

The McCulloch v. Maryland decision in 1819 fanned the flames of controversy over States' rights and national supremacy. By 1824, Chief Justice John Marshall had reached the zenith of his historic tenure on the Court and was perfectly willing to consider the most difficult areas of law.

As the American frontier moved west and settlers pushed beyond the Appalachians into the Ohio and Mississippi river valleys, the question of commercial development became very important. In 1811, the National Government began construction of the great National Road to the west through the Cumberland Gap, and State governments engaged in a frenzy of canal building, capped by New York State's 363-mile wonder, the Erie Canal. Taxation and regulation of commerce through transportation was an important source of State income in the early years of the Republic, and interstate rivalries over rights to license and collect fees from transportation services became heated. Intense economic pressures mounted as some businessmen called for more free trade while other argued for States' rights in the management of internal matters of the State...

PROMOTING Commerce v. Regulating Commerce

That is another case. The Affordable Care Act exists due to commerce that already exists.

I.  GARCLA  AND  DORMANT  COMMERCE  CLAUSE  ANALYSIS (click here)
In  attempting  to  preserve  landfill  space  through  regulations  which  either
discriminate  against or  unduly  burden" consumption  by out-of-state  interests,  a  state  quickly  finds  itself  in  the  midst  of  a  struggle  between  state sovereignty  rights  and  Congress's  commerce  clause  powers.  When  the  Supreme  Court  disengaged  economic  substantive  due  process  rights  from  the fourteenth  amendment  in  1937,16  the  Court simultaneously  cleared  the  way for  the  modern  Court's  expansive  interpretation  df  Congress's  commerce clause  powers.  For  over  half  a  century,  the  Court's  interpretation  of  the commerce  clause  enabled  Congress  to  regulate  activity  in  essentially  any area  regardless  of  the  degree  of  its  actual  impact  (or  lack  thereof)  on interstate  commerce.' Thus,  where  fundamental  notions of state sovereignty
are  allegedly infringed  by Congress's seemingly omnipotent  commerce  clause powers,  significant  disagreement  results...

Justice Sotomayor is correct, there is no class of people identified that would exclusively have the distinction of being uninsured. It is a generalized condition that occurs among all classes. In that is the understanding 'the limiting principle' is not applicable to the ACA.


There are hospitals throwing people out on the street. The emergency room is not the answer for all health problems. If a person with an 'illness' and not an injury enters the ER for treatment there is no continuity of care or any follow up with a primary physician for treatment of an illness. While a bone can be set in an emergency room, a heart condition cannot be forever treated from an ER. It is a ridiculous answer to the health needs of the people of the USA.


? To not purchase health care insurance effects no one.? BUT. Defaulting on health care providers do effect everyone. That is not a legitimate point of view because having health insurance benefits providers that are faced with raising rates to consumers when they are defaulted upon. That is a nonsense argument. 


Carbon does not like the plenary powers of Congress. Congress has to have plenary powers because the problems facing the nation is not limited. Problems can come from every venue with any dynamic. The fact the ACA is a commerce problem cannot be limited as 'exclusively' outside the powers of Congress to address. If that is going to occur, the Plutocracy then is untouchable. It's ridiculous. A definition of sovereignty includes broad plenary powers to address all the venues of a nation. Carbon wants to set health insurance in an independent paradigm outside the reach of Congress. That is an insult to the sovereignty of the USA.