Roger Pilon discusses the Powers of Congress in Interstate Commerce

[BriscoCountyJr23]

Congress is in contempt of the Constitution. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, so when Congress and Judges ignore the law, they should be imprisoned for their crimes.

[EvilDandy]

Furthermore concerning the "living document" argument, the law is an obstacle course through which lawyers and politicians must wriggle through to attain their goals, therefore it serves their interests to have a flexible constitution, a so-called living document. No one likes to be told "no", especially lawyers and politicians.

[whoo689]

The funny thing is that Madison, father of the Constitution actually predicted that the welfare clause, which is one of the most MISINTERPRETED in the Constitution used to justify so much CRAP, would be reinterpreted 1000 ways from Sunday, perverting the original intention of the Founders. I mean, regulation and deregulation of ABORTION has been argued by courts as a basis for their judicial decisions. Come on!

[whoo689]

I mean the commerce clause with respect to abortion

[a4finger]

good video

[chevydriver1123]

I really would love to see the Judge debate some of these clowns on the Constitution and watch him wipe the floor with it.

[ForTehNguyen]

damn politicians keep arguing for "living document" Constitution is nothing more than a contract b/t the federal govt and the states. So by arguing its a living document, that means any contract can be "reinterpreted" as whoever saw fit.

[picapauengracado]

Saying the Constitution is a living document is really saying that it is a dead document and you don't have to abide by it.

[Scoforever]

This idea that the inter-state commerce clause and the general welfare clause let the government do anything is just sill. If that was true then why would they have written any other part of the constitution.

[dachickenman]

It's crazy how legal positivists will reject this argument, saying how the framers weren't gods and can't control us from the grave and there needs to be the ability to interpret this document in a way fitting of the 21st century. Well, obviously the framers didn't think they were omniscient. If a subsequent generation found a change necessary in the federal government, there is a proscribed procedure for doing that contained in Article V.

[Scoforever]

Amend the constitution. And if you can just interpret it as anything then what is the point of having a constitution.

[SadegoGG]

@dachickenman

That's like saying I don't have to pay an income tax because the people who voted for the 16th Amendment was created in 1913, and nobody who voted for it is alive today. The Constitution was created to protect the American people from tyranny and big government, and its the law of the land. The Constitution created the federal government...so should we get rid of the federal government since its outdated?

[dachickenman]

@SadegoGG I'm not exactly clear if you are critiquing what I said or supplementing it, but to answer your question: yes, we should get rid of the federal government, not solely because it is outdated but because it steals more than any other entity on earth.

[SadegoGG]

@dachickenman

Our federal government under the United States Constitution isn't meant to have the great powers it has today. Through altering sociological paradigms to obsess with sports and celebrities rather than appreciating history and the Constitution. Look back at America during the times of the Articles of Confederation and you will quickly realize sole power in the states over the federal government doesn't work. The balance provided in the Constitution is the best we have.

[SadegoGG]

@dachickenman

Neglecting to uphold the Constitution by politicians, and rather to work for private interests is the cause for our governmental tyranny.