Cert Granted in Raich v. Ashcroft

[Earl Maltz]

Certainly, as a factual matter the situations are different.  However, I 
don't think that the reasoning of the Wickard Court depended upon this 
distinction.

At 11:17 AM 6/28/2004 -0400, Randy Barnett wrote:
>Earl is right.  Filburn was a commercial farmer.  However, someone with
>a home garden in her back yard is not.  In addition, the statute in
>Wickard exempted even commercial farms that were smaller than Filburn's,
>but still much larger than a back yard garden solely for home
>consumption.  A ruling for the government in Raich would represent a
>very serious, indeed a landmark, expansion of the ruling in Wickard--and
>a rejection of the principles announced in Lopez and reaffirmed in
>Morrison.
>
>_____________________________________________
>Randy E. Barnett
>Austin B. Fletcher Professor
>Boston University School of Law
>765 Commonwealth Ave.
>Boston, MA  02215
>617-353-3099 (phone)
>617-353-3077 (fax)
>http://www.RandyBarnett.com
>http://www.LysanderSpooner.org (Lysander Spooner page)
>http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/7648.html (Restoring the Lost
>Constitution page)
>http://www.RandyBarnett.com/SOL.htm (Structure of Liberty page)