Talk:Commerce Clause

More specific dates

Under "The Rehquist Court", last main paragraph, RE: 10th Amendment "in the last two decades" this phrase needs to be more specific about the dates. The last two decades from today will be different than the last two decades prior to 50 years from now, so who will know which last two decades this means? --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 17:02, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I changed the wording. See if that is satisfactory.    Thorncrag  18:17, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Commerce Clause. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011145739/http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/03-1454.html to http://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/03-1454.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110701022152/http://www.ncsl.org/documents/health/ACANews12.pdf to http://www.ncsl.org/documents/health/ACANews12.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

"Interstate transport" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Interstate transport. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 9#Interstate transport until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:41, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

The Original Intent of the Commerce Clause

Summary

The original intent of the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution) was to remove/reduce burdens and obstructions to the free-flow of trade in commerce among the States.[1] The original intent is still alive and well today - clearly understood by the Supreme Court in its Dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence[2], but the Court selectively ignores the original intent across the rest of the Commerce Clause corpus juris. Congress regularly transgresses the limitations put on its police powers to exercise an unconstitutional power (i.e enacting criminal statutes beyond those of the four powers) in violation of 1. the original intent of the Commerce Clause; 2. principles of federalism and dual sovereignty; and 3. the Tenth Amendment. The very foundation of our Rule of Law has been subverted and "sunk" into a Serbonian Bog of illegal legislation[3].

Footnotes. 1. Florida v. United States HHS, 780 F. Supp. 2d 1256, 1276-77 (ND FL 2011).

2. Tenn. Wine & Spirits Retailers v. Thomas, 139 S. Ct. 2449, 2460 (2019)

3. Milton, John. 1969. Paradise Lost. Four Harvard Classics: The Complete Poems of John Milton. Harvard University Press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.247.81.94 (talk) 05:23, 1 November 2022 (UTC)