Kagan Selection: Unhealthy for the Constitution
I introduce, as Exhibit A on behalf of this choice, the provision in Obamacare that requires every American citizen to buy a health-insurance policy. When the case challenging the constitutionality of that provision reaches the Supreme Court (as about 20 state attorneys general are currently attempting to accomplish by litigation), the government will argue that it is permitted under the power of the federal government to regulate interstate commerce.Supporters of this mandate claim it is akin to requiring drivers to carry liability insurance.
They will be forced to argue that the mere inaction of an individual American citizen is an act of interstate commerce worthy of regulation. If that proposition is upheld by the Supreme Court, then we will no longer have a limited government. The government would then have the power to outlaw and punish (by fine or prison term) any American’s decision not to exercise, not to vote, not to eat four servings of vegetables a day — any human inaction would be sanctionable under the Interstate Commerce Clause — and then adios liberty.
1. States issue drivers licences not the U.S. Government. The feds are precluded from usurping this responsibility.
2. People don't have to drive. Driving is a privilege. Breathing, and being left alone to do it, is a right.
You want health insurance you have the right to buy it. You don't you have the right to live with the consequences.
No doubt, Obama expects Kagan to uphold his healthcare plan. Her views on the Commerce Clause and how elastic it is, ought to be fleshed out. And if she refuses to answer questions that she herself has said nominees should answer, she should be denied a seat on the court.