Originally Written on
December 29th, 2014
Edited and Expanded
on December 3rd, 2015
Title Borrowed from Andrew Napolitano
Thanks to the 1942 U.S. Supreme
Court case Wickard v. Filburn,
private intrastate non-commerce is now regarded as public interstate commerce.
You read that correctly; if you refuse to sell your property, keep it on your
own land, and you don’t move it into another state, that is legally the same as
going into another state in order to sell your property.
Thanks to the 1964 case Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States,
private intrastate commerce is regarded as interstate commerce affecting the
public. You read that correctly; if you set up a business in one state, and you
don’t set up any branches in any other states, you are engaged in interstate
commerce, because you might serve people from out-of-state. Actually, you might
even be required to do so. Additionally,
as a result of that case, the distinction between what is public property versus what is private property is
blurred and virtually non-existent.
Thanks to the 2005 case Kelo v. City of New London, private “economic
development” projects satisfy the Public Use Clause of the Fifth Amendment. You
read that correctly; not only has the Supreme Court long since rendered moot
the issue of whether you are allowed to refuse government “offers” to buy your
property and compensate you for it; now the government can use Eminent Domain
to transfer your private property – your home or business – to another private owner, and pay you
whatever it damn well pleases.
Thanks to the 2012 case National Federation of Independent
Businesses v. Sebelius (the Obamacare case), non-commerce is commerce. You
read that correctly; refraining to engage in commerce (in this case, to
purchase health insurance) is engaging in commerce. Also, a penalty is now
regarded as a tax; the government can fine you a “tax” upon the zero-dollar “transaction”
of not buying a health insurance
policy. Not only has the Supreme Court long since abandoned the idea that a tax
on a good must be modest, and not
levied in egregious disproportion to the original value of the good; it now
says that an infinity-percent “tax” can be levied upon something that does not
even exist?
How long can a civil society
survive, when it believes that “public” means “private”, “in-state” means “between
states”, not buying something is commerce, and taking someone’s money because
they did nothing, is a “tax”, rather than a fine, a penalty, or pure and simple
theft?
How long can a civil society
survive believing that words have no meaning, or that two plus two equals five?
Cue calliope music.
