The Washington Post has an interesting editorial today on the record of Judge John Roberts. What I really found interesting was the following statement:

There is really only one opinion Judge Roberts has written that potentially signals anything of serious concern, and that is the first one he wrote while on the court. The opinion is troubling because it suggests a too-narrow view of Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce — the constitutional backbone of the modern regulatory state.

That is the statists’ argument in a nutshell. A very broad reading of the Commerce Clause provides the legal fig leaf for Congress and the Executive Branch to do whatever it wants when it comes to the regulation of private property.

In all honesty, we are not speaking of a “backbone.” Instead, the Commerce Clause has become the “hook” on which to hang the doctrine that there should be no limit whatsoever to the powers of the federal government. Why am I not surprised that one of the twin pillars of the modern political establishment, the Washington Post (the NY Times is the other), wants Washington to have unlimited powers?