Steven_R
Tommy Vercetti Fan Club
- Jul 17, 2013
- 4,852
- 925
- 245
yep. The Supremes even had to acknowledge that there was no authority under Congress' list of authorized areas of responsibilities so they had to shoehorn Social Security as somehow being legal under the Spending Clause, just like Wickard v Filburn twisted the Commerce Clause into somehow authorizing Congress to decide what one farmer could and could not grow for personal consumption.