Constitutional attorney David Rivkin discussed the legal implications of President Obama’s announcement on gun control on Fox and Friends on January 16, 2013.
“We did not know for sure, we clearly know one thing, he cannot do by executive order anything that Congress has not delegated. […] He cannot ban high capacity magazines by executive order. ” – Rivkin in response to Brian Kilmeade’s question on what to expect today.
Has the United States Constitution become outdated and obsolete? Constitutional attorney David Rivkin debates Constitutional Law Professor Louis Michael Seidman on whether or not it’s time to ditch the Constitution.
By defining the mandate as a tax, one that will not be uniformly applied, the Supreme Court ran afoul of the Constitution.
By David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey
ObamaCare is being implemented, having been upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court in June in a series of cases now known as National Federation of Independent Business v. HHS. It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that the court took a law that was flawed but potentially workable and transformed it into one that is almost certainly unworkable. More important, the justices also may have created new and fatal constitutional problems.
ObamaCare, or the Affordable Care Act, was conceived as a complex statutory scheme designed to provide Americans with near-universal health-care coverage and to effectively federalize the nation’s health-care system. The law’s core provision was an individual health-insurance purchase mandate, adopted by Congress as a “regulation” of interstate commerce. The provision required most Americans to buy federally determined minimum health-care insurance, or to pay a penalty more or less equivalent to the cost of that coverage.
Appellate and international attorney David Rivkin joins a panel at the Cato Institute’s annual publication of its review of the Supreme Court and its Constitution Day celebration in Washington D.C.
The following highlight’s David Rivkin and his remarks on the 2011 Supreme Court term review and health care law to the panel and audience members.
Appellate and international attorney David Rivkin joins a panel at the Cato Institute’s annual publication of its review of the Supreme Court and its Constitution Day celebration in Washington D.C.
The following segment highlight’s David Rivkin and his remarks on the 2011 Supreme Court term review and health care law.
Democrats regard federalism as quaint, Republicans at least pay lip service to it
By David B. Rivkin Jr. and Elizabeth Price Foley
In the presidential debates, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney ranged across dozens of topics, but an important one didn’t come up: federalism. And no wonder.
The idea that the Constitution grants only limited and enumerated powers and leaves the remainder to the states is foreign to those who believe that the national government should or even could address voters’ every concern. But contrary to the view widely shared by the political class, Washington—in particular, Congress—does not have the power to pass any law it wants in the name of the “general welfare.”
Politicians should take heed. Voters are increasingly focused on the proper role of government in society: Witness the rise of the tea party and unease over the massive debt caused by entitlements and other government handouts. The continuing loud objection to ObamaCare’s takeover of health care shows that voters want to preserve the Constitution’s architecture of limited federal power.