This from a contributor to the New York Times is typical of the mindset that debilitates the Leftie legal crowd in this country:
"It seems curious that opponents of the health care law are now looking to the commerce clause, as opposed to the Bill of Rights, as a bulwark of individual liberty."
You read that bass ackwards analysis and think: Is it any wonder that they are totally dumbfounded by the fact that a majority of members of the Supreme Court might actually overturn ObamaCare on constitutional grounds?
I challenge this Pulitzer Prize-winning author and professor to name one opponent of Obama's health care monstrosity who maintains that the Constitution's Commerce Clause is "a bulwark of individual liberty." ONE.
The truth is the exact opposite.
We maintain the fact that there are - or should be - limits to the way that Commerce Clause is interpreted. And we maintain that Congress - with Supreme Court acquiescence - and a wink and a nod - has, over the years, abused its meaning and application. We don't want to liberate the Commerce Clause; we want it corralled.
The Commerce Clause is being used by the federal government to justify the regulation of non-commerce (the insurance mandate), for Christ's sake.
When geniuses like this guy understand the argument, maybe they'll be less shocked by the obvious. ObamaCare is unconstitutional. Learn it. Deal with it.