makers, and the public.

in 70 major markets, as well as a diverse group of thought leaders, decision

edition of the New York Times. The op-ed feature reaches over 5 million readers
WLF ’s Civic Communications Program publishes “In All Fairness” in the national
IN ALL FAIRNESS

Unlimited Government
Prosecutors have so much control over ruled that economic inactivity (i.e. not buying
the justice system, the saying goes, that they insurance) is beyond Congress’s regulatory
can indict a ham sandwich. The direction our grasp. One of the judges bluntly stated that
government is headed, federal officials may Congress cannot constitutionally require
soon wield the power to make you buy and someone to act “based solely on citizenship
eat that ham sandwich. Sound ludicrous? It’s and on being alive.”
not so far-fetched consider- Government lawyers defending
ing the revolutionary constitu- ObamaCare have actually argued for an
tional arguments our govern- interpretation of the Commerce Clause that
ment is making to defend its would allow Congress to force us to eat broc-
new health care law. coli because failing to do so undermines the
Complex beyond belief vegetable market as well as our health and,
and haphazardly rushed to in turn, affects the health care system. Or, as
Daniel J. Popeo passage on Christmas Eve, discussed in one ObamaCare case, govern-
Chairman ObamaCare represents ment could compel us to buy General Motors
Washington sausage-factory lawmaking
Legal Foundation
cars since such purchases will assist both
at its worst. In their zeal to the U.S. auto market and a taxpayer-subsi-
pass the law, “reformers” demonstrated little dized company.
concern for the financial health of the States The federal government’s legal arguments
or cash-strapped Americans, and even less on ObamaCare reflect a broader self-right-
for the U.S. Constitution. Such disregard is eous perspective on constitutional limits. The
most evident in the “Individual Mandate,” the Administration’s response to judicial invalida-
linchpin that holds ObamaCare together. The tion of its health
law dictates all Americans must buy health care law: full speed Torturing the
insurance or pay a hefty fine to the IRS. ahead on imple-
To justify this remarkable regulatory mentation. And Constitution
authority, ObamaCare’s congressional sup- when asked which
THE NEW YORK TIMES OP-ED MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2011

porters essentially reinterpreted the constitutional provision supported the law’s

Constitution’s Commerce Clause. Under passage, then-Speaker Pelosi responded,
their tortuous reading of the clause, a per- “Are you kidding?” Such a central-govern-
sonal decision not to engage in economic ment power mentality, and the over-regula-
activity is in fact economic activity which, in a tion it has inspired, hangs around the neck of
roundabout way, affects interstate com- our economy like an anchor.
merce. Recognizing how such a view Our judiciary exists as a bulwark against
sweeps away constitutional limits on federal legislative and executive overreach. Within a
power while financially disadvantaging many year, the Supreme Court will have an oppor-
of their citizens, 28 States have challenged tunity to safeguard our freedom by reminding
ObamaCare’s Individual Mandate in federal lawmakers of their limits. Let’s hope the jus-
court. tices are up to the task.
It’s rare for a federal trial court judge to
invalidate a federal law, especially on the
grounds that Congress exceeded its authori-
ty. Yet, two federal judges have separately
held the Mandate unconstitutional. Both
WA S H INGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION • 2009 MA SSA C H U SET T S AVE., N W • WA SH IN GTON , D C 20036 • http://www.wlf.o r g
In All Fairness is pr o d u ced t h r o u g h W L F ’s C ivic C o m m u n icat io n s Pr o g r am .