Coston's Complaint: Justice Stephen Breyer Uses Supremacy Clause to Enslave Us All

Friday, March 30, 2012

Justice Stephen Breyer Uses Supremacy Clause to Enslave Us All

The ideologues on the Supreme Court are trying to justify Obamacare and its mandate that forces Americans to buy a product. Associate Justice Stephen Breyer harkened back to the Supremacy Clause and the ruling that foisted the corrupt Biddle’s Bank on the American people. CNS reported the following:

Alito had asked Verrilli if Congress could force young people to buy burial insurance because everyone is going to die someday. Roberts asked Verrilli if Congress could force people to buy cell phones because it would facilitate contacting emergency services in the event of an accident. And Kennedy asked Verrilli: “Can you create commerce in order to regulate it.”

“I'm somewhat uncertain about your answers to, for example, Justice Kennedy,” said Breyer. He “asked, can you, under the Commerce Clause, Congress create commerce where previously none existed.

“Well, yes,” said Breyer, “I thought the answer to that was, since McCulloch versus Maryland, when the Court said Congress could create the Bank of the United States which did not previously exist, which job was to create commerce that did not previously exist, since that time the answer has been, yes.

“I would have thought that your answer [to] can the government, in fact, require you to buy cell phones or buy burials that, if we propose comparable situations, if we have, for example, a uniform United States system of paying for every burial such as Medicare Burial, Medicaid Burial, Ship Burial, ERISA Burial and Emergency Burial beside the side of the road, and Congress wanted to rationalize that system, wouldn't the answer be: Yes, of course, they could,” said Breyer.

“And the same with the computers, or the same with the cell phones, if you're driving by the side of the highway and there is a federal emergency service, just as you say you have to buy certain mufflers for your car that don't hurt the environment, you could,” said Breyer.

“I mean, see, doesn't it depend on the situation?” said Breyer.

“It does, Justice Breyer,” said Verrilli, “and if Congress were to enact laws like that, we –”

“Would be up here defending it,” said Breyer.

Maybe the American people should educate Justice Stephen Breyer as to the fate of the 2nd Bank of the United States. Here is how Ohio responded to the famed McCulloch v. Maryland ruling:

The states ignored the ruling. Ohio imposed a $50,000-per-year-tax on each of the two branches in the state. The BUS refused to pay. Ohio sent its tax auditor to collect the money. The bank’s management wouldn’t comply, so the auditor leaped over the counter and helped himself. Needless to say, the BUS filed a federal lawsuit. The Ohio state legislature flipped the finger at the federal government with the following declaration:

We are aware of the doctrine, that the Federal courts are exclusively vested with jurisdiction to declare, in the last resort, the true interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. To this doctrine…we can never give our assent.

President Andrew Jackson also offered his opinion on the Supreme Court’s decision on BUS:

To this conclusion I cannon assent…Congress and the President as well as the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. It is as much of the duty of the House of the Representatives, of the Senate, and the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented…The opinion of the [Supreme Court] justices has no authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over judges, and on that point the President is independent of both. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive…but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.

Andrew Jackson defied the courts and Congress when he vetoed their charter. Here is an excerpt from The Rise and Fall of the American Whig Party:

Jackson’s veto message denounced the Bank as an unconstitutional excess of national authority, as a monstrous concentration of power that favored the rich at the expense of the poor. The message tremendously enhanced Jackson’s credentials as a champion of republicanism and strict construction and as a foe of the corrupt and entrenched political establishment in Congress. Democratic newspapers and resolutions around the country praised Jackson for saving “the people from becoming enslaved by the corruptions of a moneyed aristocracy and desperate politicians.” The veto marked “the final decision of the President between the Aristocracy and the People – he stands by the People.” “The Jackson cause,” one paper summarized, “is the cause of democracy and the people, against a corrupt and abandoned aristocracy.”