This article contains some background on the commerce clause and 10th amendment fights, including quick summaries of the key court cases that have greatly expanded Federal power. While my level of hope is low that SCOTUS will correct past mistakes, I strongly support a narrow reading of the commerce clause. After all, do you really think the Feds should be able to control how much wheat you grow for your own use on your own land? Does that sound like “Land of the Free” to you?
For years, Mr. Marbut argued that a wide range of federal laws, not just gun regulations, should be invalid because they were based on an erroneous interpretation of Congress's constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce.
Ten state attorneys general, dozens of elected officials and an array of conservative groups are b acking the legal challenge he engineered to get his constitutional theory before the Supreme Court. A federal appeals court in San Francisco is now considering his case.
Mr. Marbut isn't basing his pro-gun effort on the Second Amendment, the one that talks about a right to bear arms, but on the 10th, which discusses the limits of federal power.
He concluded the Supreme Court had twisted the words of the commerce clause, which grants Congress authority to "regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States."
He conceived of the Firearms Freedo m Act as a way to get it reconsidered. He says he focused on the commerce clause, rather than Second Amendment theories popular with firearms enthusiasts, to prompt a broad ruling that would rein in federal power.