by Bob Barr | May 8, 2024 | Townhall Article |
Townhall Will wonders never cease? The federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) reportedly is considering moving marijuana from the most highly restricted class of “Controlled Substances” – Schedule I – where it has resided for more than half a century, to the far-less restrictive category as a Schedule III drug. This reclassification, if actually implemented, truly would represent a sea change in federal drug policy, which since 1970 has been defined by the Nixon-era Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, of which the Controlled Substances Act is found at Title II. As with much federal regulatory power, Uncle Sam’s control over drugs, including “controlled substances” and all manner of prescription medications, is implied – deriving from numerous laws passed by the Congress and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court as legitimate under the so-called “commerce power” found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Despite the otherwise clear limiting language in that Section of the Constitution that congressional power to legislate extends only to “commerce” between states, ever since President Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal” in the 1930s, all three branches of the federal government have eagerly gobbled up powers clearly never dreamed of by those who wrote and ratified that document. The final bulwark against this deluge was essentially destroyed in 1942, when the High Court found constitutional under the Commerce Clause, the federal government’s power to regulate the price of wheat grown by a farmer in Ohio (Roscoe Filburn) even though none of his product was used or sold beyond the borders of the Buckeye State. The tortured reasoning that underpinned the Supreme Court’s decision in Wickard v. Filburn, provided a...
by Bob Barr | Apr 25, 2024 | Townhall Article |
Townhall An adage learned early in the career of a trial attorney is, “if the law is not on your side, argue the facts, and if the facts are not on your side, argue the law, but if neither the facts nor the law are on your side, make sure you get your fee up front and in cash,” because you are almost certain to lose your case. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is paid by Big Apple taxpayers regardless of whether he wins or loses a case, but he deserves to lose the so-called “hush money” case against former President Donald Trump because neither the law nor the facts justify this prosecution. Although the trial in the case, styled “THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK against DONALD J. TRUMP, Defendant,” is in its early stages, any reasonably objective analysis of the applicable facts and the law leaves one with far more doubt than could be considered “reasonable” that the 45th President of the United States committed even a single one of the 34 criminal acts alleged by Mr. Bragg. Media attention focuses on virtually every real or perceived aspect of what happens inside the courtroom of Judge Juan Merchan, down to and including the thermostat setting and Trump’s posture; such irrelevancies are fodder for media pundits on both sides of today’s ever-present partisan political divide. It is, of course, not surprising that conservative media outlets believe Trump to be absolutely and unquestionably innocent, while their liberal counterparts can hardly contain their glee at the former President’s predicament and wish him a speedy trip to Riker’s Island. Much...
by Bob Barr | Apr 17, 2024 | Uncategorized |
Townhall President Biden’s family, individuals within his Administration, and his political supporters will defend him aggressively when former President Trump and others in the GOP deride him for his many gaffes and policy blunders. Mainstream media pundits will continue to cover for him when presented with inescapable evidence of his advanced age. There is, however, one trait exhibited repeatedly by the current President that is beyond dispute or defense even by his most ardent supporters – Biden’s utter disdain for the rule of law. This disturbing characteristic was on full display recently with the signing of a regulatory “rule” placing further limits on the Second Amendment without bothering to secure the legislative approval to do so as required by the Constitution. Constitutional Law 101 reminds us that of the three branches of our government, only the Legislative is empowered to pass, amend, or change laws. In fact, the very first operative sentence of the Constitution makes this abundantly clear, vesting All legislative Powers in the Congress; not in the presidency and not in the Courts. Once the Congress has spoken by passing legislation, and once signed by the president, it becomes the law of the land and can be changed only by subsequent act of Congress. It is black-letter law that a president cannot, consistent with the Constitution and the principle that America operates as “a government of laws, and not of men,” simply change terms defined and codified in statutes to suit his policy preferences. This is, however, exactly what the Biden Administration has done with long-standing firearms laws which provide that if individuals or businesses regularly and...
