Separately, Senator Tom Coburn was the only senator to hold Kagan's feet to the fire. He posed a hypothetical about the limits of the Commerce Clause: can the federal government mandate citizens eat fruits and vegetables every day? Kagan got out of it by endorsing the Supreme Court jurisprudence that the Commerce Clause does not apply to "non-economic activity"—but of course, nearly everything counts as economic activity under the left's version of the Commerce Clause, where all Congress would have to do pass this law is recite "findings" that the failure to eat fruits and vegetables had a deleterious effect on the nation's economy. [YouTube; Politico; LA Times]
Copland on Kagan
Related Entries:
- A better solution to prison overcrowding
- American Express v. Italian Colors
- Our legal academy
- New Podcasts: Reactions to the Obamacare decision
- The implications
- It's the Spending Clause, stupid!
- The decision (with apologies to Lebron James)
- Two senses of federalism
- Winning the battle, but losing the war (for expansive federal government power)?
- Roberts can be criticized, but he's no Souter
- Writing conservatives out of "mainstream" thought
- The ACA, Intrade, and other tea leaves
- Kansas Supreme Court attempts to dictate national antitrust policy
- HR 5
- Wherein George Soros wastes his money
![]() |
Rafael Mangual Project Manager, Legal Policy rmangual@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
Communications Manhattan Institute communications@manhattan-institute.org |