Of Arms and the Law
Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home
Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography

ISOcover150x200sm.jpg

I've released my documentary film on the history of the right to arms, "In Search of the Second Amendment." It stars twelve professors of constitutional law, plus Steve Halbrook, David Kopel, Don Kates, and Clayton Cramer. You can order the DVD here. And here's the Wikipedia page on it. SUPREME COURT SPECIAL: additional orders only $10 each.


2nd Amendment Discussions
1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Survivalist Blog
The BitchGirls
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Visitors since April 1, 2005: Free Web Counter
Free Hit Counter

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 3.15
Site Design by Sekimori

« Hot news from Drudge Report | Main | And to think... »

A note on the commerce clause

Posted by David Hardy · 19 February 2007 03:07 PM

After hearing an argument in the Supreme Court, a spectator writes:

"According to the construction now contended for, and what is more than probable will be supported by the Supreme Court, the states can do nothing, which it is not in the power of Congress to regulate; and there is scarcely any change they can can act upon at all – the trade, or commerce, being helpful to the regulation of Congress, is supposed to draw after it almost all power of regulation."

The surprising thing is that this was written in 1824, and the argument was in Gibbons v. Ogden.

Via the Volokh Conspiracy.

· Commerce Clause

Comments

Would you care to translate that into English? I understood the words being used, but the context and conclusing they were drawing completely escapes me.

Posted by: Nimrod45 at February 20, 2007 04:23 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)