AND WONDERING WHY if it’s so obvious to me, why somebody with more throw weight hasn’t advanced the argument forcefully. It seems dispositive to me, and would be a slam dunk in nuking Obamacare — among other odious policies.
Follow the argument.
We have a right to liberty. Capital “L” Liberty. Statists and other unsavory creatures will no doubt carp and cavil that this is not so, and advance pettifogging arguments to advance that position, but, in truth, it’s undeniable. Self-Evident, if you will. It has even been enshrined in our national Holy Writ.
The Declaration of Independence lays it out:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.
–Thomas Jefferson et al, 1776
And, while the committee which authored the Declaration did not comprise the same individuals as the Constitution, it is risible to assert that there is not, nonetheless, a certain philosophical continuity between the two bodies. When it comes to Original Intent, the intent to enshrine and defend capital “L” Liberty in our national charter must be taken as the prime mover. It is the raison d’etre of the whole edifice. It says so right there on the side of the box.
So, when the authors of the Constitution were moved to Amend that document with the Bill of Rights, it seemed only sensible to include the Ninth and Tenth
IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
“Shall not be construed to deny or disparage…” clearly ought to include those Rights specifically enumerated in the Declaration — which also clearly ought to imply (or even exply*) that the contention that the Declaration has never been enacted into Law is… well… ridiculous.
And, when drawing a straight line from Point A to Point C, one also intersects Point B, one must conclude that there is some congruence in play.
That the Declaration states we have a Right to Liberty, and that Governments are [in|con]stituted among Men to defend the Right to Liberty, we have a small “c” constitutional Right to Liberty. And the Ninth Amendment recognizes that fact. Which makes the right large-“C” Constitutional.
So. If we have a Constitutional right to liberty, and an act of Congress is a plain affront to that liberty, then that act must be, as day follows night, un-Constitutional.
And, if Obamacare is not an affront to liberty on so many fronts, then there can be no such thing as liberty. It is, as the saying goes, self-evident.
Kyew. Ee. Dee.
*Exply: to make explicit, just as to imply is to make implicit.