The Healthcare debate could be very interesting for constitutional scholars

The rest of us will just sit here and wait for the next show to fall.  But from Alamo City Pundit we find this argument.

New Battle of the Alamo (ISD); Will Healthcare Be Decided in San Antonio?
April 6, 2010 by Johnny Alamo

So, in an odd confluence of the two, it appears that the battle over the Healthcare Bill may be decided by . . . a 1990’s San Antonio Gun Control case, of all things!

WASHINGTON — A San Antonio high school senior’s decision to bring a .38 caliber handgun to class in 1992 could end up at the center of the coming legal fight over President Barack Obama’s health reform plan.

Therefore, to solve this problem, cipla generic viagra online stores are established to supply different types of products that promise to address your problems in terms of erectile dysfunction have been out in the market and online with an affordable price. Though 140 men were first tested, 30 were eliminated because of health reasons and because they were not ready order cheap viagra buying this to adapt to new lifestyle changes that can really guide you optimize the lushness. Only the provider cialis generic wholesale will know the amount you are ordering, the price, and delivery details. The entire drug will increase the efficacy of the drugs to the FDA or other such organizations. sildenafil 50mg price

Alfonso Lopez Jr.’s arrest at Edison High School set in motion a courtroom battle that is likely to be studied by the 13 state attorneys general fighting the new health care law. Lopez, a high school senior when he was arrested on a handgun possession charge in March 1992, ended up facing federal charges of violating the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990.

But the Supreme Court, on a 5-4 vote, threw out his conviction in 1995 on the ground that Congress exceeded its regulatory authority under the Constitution when it approved the 1990 law, which made it a violation of federal law to possess a firearm in a school zone.

In filing a lawsuit last week challenging the new health care law’s mandate that everyone must have health insurance, the 13 state attorneys general cited the same legal reasoning that went into the high court’s Lopez ruling.

At issue in both cases is the Constitution’s commerce clause, which limits the regulatory powers of Congress to matters involving interstate commerce. The attorneys general argue that Congress exceeded that limit by requiring individuals to purchase health insurance or pay a fine.

The emphasis is mine, go read Alamo City Pundit for the rest of the story.