I hear that Antonin Scalia likes to use “original intent” when interpreting the Constitution. What, for example, would our first president, George Washington, have thought about a law that “created commerce” be forcing people to buy something they might not have otherwise wanted to own? Let’s a take a look at a law that he signed during his first term in office.
Second Militia Act of 1792
The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every “free able-bodied white male citizen” between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company overseen by the state. Militia members were to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack.
So, the government can conscript you into a militia against your will and force you to buy a gun, bayonet, belt, flints, and bullets, but it can’t make you purchase health insurance?
Here’s Scalia wanking during oral arguments on the Affordable Care Act:
JUSTICE SCALIA:…The argument here is that this [mandate] also is — may be necessary, but it’s not proper because it violates an equally evident principle in the Constitution, which is that the Federal Government is not supposed to be a government that has all powers; that it’s supposed to be a government of limited powers. And that’s what all this questioning has been about. What — what is left?
If the government can do this, what, what else can it not do?
I don’t know. One of my older brothers was born in Stuttgart, Germany. That wasn’t because my parents wanted to be there. It’s because my father was drafted. Fortunately, he didn’t have to pay for his own gun, bullets, and knapsack.
