Dow might be right that that the Constitution provides government with the power to guarantee medical coverage and to implement a system to pay for it — but that power would exist at the state level. Nowhere does the Constitution enumerate that as a power of the federal government — and the Constitution clearly reserves unenumerated powers to the states. (Emphasis supplied)

Might be right? Please. He would be absolutely right if, like Coulter, he directed his argument to the states. The only restrictions on governmental authority are those found in the constitution, mostly in the amendments. Those amendments do not restrict the states from requiring insurance so the states can require insurance if their constitutions do not block that power.

This business that the court has not acted in nearly a century to reign in congressional commerce clause activity proves only that such action is long overdue. It’s high time that pendulum starts to swing the other way. We are well on our way to 20 trillion examples.

I graduated from UH Law Center and know Professor Dow. He’s relatively popular among the law students – it’s a law school after all, and every bit as liberal as you’d think it is despite being in Texas (in fact, Houston is a relatively liberal city overall).

I couldn’t stand the guy. He’s one of those profs who knows he’s well-liked and that nothing will happen to him if he acts like a liberal tool, and so he always feels free to interject his bias into the curriculum.

Needless to say, that kind of crap isn’t what I thought I was paying for when I signed up.

Good school for the cost, though. I was able to translate my JD into a solid partner level position in seven years. Conservatives shouldn’t have to put up with that though, it’s just wrong.

Blacksheep on April 4, 2012 at 9:32 PM

The moon-battery described to me by my children from their college professors made me regret the money I sent to send them to school. And this was allegedly a “christian college” mind you.

The entire education system in this country is a grand farce, and conservative children are viciously attacked by it.

How these people are even able to put their pants on in the morning without help, much less be allowed to influence the masses, many of whom have no legal expertise, is mind-boggling to me.

I know changing the law would be tricky, what with the delicate system of checks and balances and all that. I initially thought the Supreme Court should determine the president’s fate… but since the president appoints the SCOTUS justices, he’d just stack the deck in his favor before doing any shenanigans. I guess I’m just wishing there was a way we could “politics-proof” the impeachment process.

If this professor would come out of his ivory tower every now and then, he’d know that the poor already have, or are eligible for, health care insurance. Hey prof, ever heard of Medicaid? In my state, it includes dental and vision, something a lot of plans that cover those of us who actually work for our coverage, do not.

It’s too bad we can’t impeach tenured moonbat professors and make them come out here and work for a living.

Resist We Much on April 4, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Thanks!

Dow’s argument that the individual mandate is constitutional is exactly what you would expect: If you are going to voluntarily do something (e.g. drive a car), the government can make you purchase a product (e.g. insurance) provided it has a good reason for doing so (e.g. making sure you can pay for any damage you do). This argument might make some sense if the activity for which Obamacare mandates insurance was something more than merely existing.

So, if I choose to not own a car and choose to ride my bike or take public transportation instead I’ll still be forced to buy auto insurance to help cover the costs of other auto driver’s or be fined like the way Obamacare works?

AZfederalist on April 4, 2012 at 9:08 PM

“IMPEACH EARL WARREN ELENA KAGAN!”

sixties flashback . . .

Simple, this falls under the “give me liberty, or give me free s^^t” amendment.

southsideironworks on April 4, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Actually I think it’s……

“Keep the liberty, just give me the free $h!+”

and what time was American Idol on again?

slickwillie2001 on April 4, 2012 at 9:29 PM

My bad, I don’t generally seek the enlightenment of the LSM.

Maybe I missed it. Tell me where it says you can impeach USSC justices.

But I know where it says we can impeach Øbama.

Bring it.

petefrt on April 4, 2012 at 8:27 PM

U.S. Constitution

Article II, Section 4

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Constitution also allows for involuntary removal from office. The President, Vice-President, Cabinet Secretaries, and other executive officers, as well as judges, may be impeached by the House of Representatives and tried in the Senate.

Any convicted by impeachment is immediately removed from office. The Senate may also choose to bar the removed official from holding any federal office in the future. No other punishments may be inflicted pursuant to the impeachment proceeding, but the convicted party remains liable to trial and punishment in the courts for civil and criminal charges.

Article III, Section 1.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

‘Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.’

avgjo on April 4, 2012 at 9:22 PM

And those who can’t do or teach become critics.

With a small handful of exceptions, my professors left me with the impression that the statement is true:

‘Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.’

avgjo on April 4, 2012 at 9:22 PM

And those who can’t teach, teach others how to teach.

Didn’t want to leave your aphorism imcomplete….

;-)

I couldn’t stand the guy. He’s one of those profs who knows he’s well-liked and that nothing will happen to him if he acts like a liberal tool, and so he always feels free to interject his bias into the curriculum.

Needless to say, that kind of crap isn’t what I thought I was paying for when I signed up.

Good school for the cost, though. I was able to translate my JD into a solid partner level position in seven years. Conservatives shouldn’t have to put up with that though, it’s just wrong.

antipc on April 4, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Haven’t you heard, it’s now spelled Trayvon™®©.

Well….you tell me Tom.

NapaConservative on April 4, 2012 at 5:51 PM

That would be a bit of a constitutional hurdle for the bamster. My guess is that he and the racist black caucus are intentionally inciting retribution over Trayvon Williams incident to declare martial law.

‘Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach.’

http://volokh.com/2012/04/04/judicial-activism-for-me-but-not-for-thee/