| noname2200 said: Actually, I don't believe this is true at all. If driving was a right, it would still impact interstate commerce, and therefore fall under the commerce clause. There might be more restrictions on the mandate, most likely that the impoverished can forego insurance at their option, but again, the commerce clause does not contain an exemption that says that economic activities that are otherwise constitutional rights are exempt from the commerce clause. Those intervening rights might restrict the applicability of the commerce clause (again, see the above example), but unless the intervening right is some absolute that states it's impervious to other regulation, I don't see the issue. |
We don't really know if a car insurance mandate would fall under the commerce clause, though, because car insurance is mandated at the state level and not the federal level. In the strictest definition of regulation - the one the framers likely meant, IMO - that would be "to make regular". But it isn't regular, since auto insurance requirements vary from state to state.
