Battering Ram Da 1nc

7/24/2019 Battering Ram Da 1nc

1/5

The plans a federalist battering ramspills over and sends the Commerce Causeback a centuryOrbach et al 10Associate Professor of Law, University of Arizona James E. Rogers College ofLaw(Bara, wit! "at!leen #. Calla!an an$ Lisa %. Lin$emenn, &AR%') #*A*E#+ R')*#- E/ERAL'#%, PR'0A*E LA1%A"ER#,

A/ *E BA**ER') RA% #*RA*E)23, AR'45A LA1 RE0'E1 605L. 78-99:9;98

The battering ram strategy is a ?ro?osal for @ncoo?erative fe$eralismcrafte$ y a ?rivate lawmaer.*!e strengt! of t!e ram corres?on$s to t!e effectiveness of its creator. or eam?le, t!e ?rivate lawmaers ailities as a loyist

contri@te to t!e rams ?ower eca@se the force of the ram increases with the number of states

(an$ localities, if a??licale> that clone and enact the?rivate lawmaers proposedbill. *!e?rivate

lawmaers effectiveness in several ot!er $imensionss@c! as in t!e aility to $raft a legally ro@st @n$erlying?ro?osal, create alliances among a$o?ting states an$ localities, an$ form@late a so?!isticate$litigation strategyalso strengt!ens t!e ram. *!e organizational services ?rovi$e$ y t!e ?rivate lawmaer are?artic@larly val@ale for t!e ?@r?oses of mareting t!e conce?t to t!e ?@lic an$ litigating against t!e fe$eral government. A&@niform co$e3 $rafte$ y an effective ?rivate lawmaer an$ a$o?te$ y m@lti?le states to c!allenge t!e fe$eral government t!@soffers significant ?otential organizational enefits.

*!e Commerce Battering Ramstrategyis an elaorate?oliticalDlegal a??arat@sof @ncoo?erative fe$eralism

w!ic! targets current Commerce Clause jurisprudence in an effort to roll back thefederal governments role in the markets . *!e core log of t!is a??arat@s is t!e *ent! Amen$ment, w!ic!reserves to t!e states or t!e ?eo?le all ?owers &not $elegate$ to t!e Unite$ #tates y t!e Constit@tion nor ?ro!iite$ y it to t!e

states.< *!e *ent! Amen$ment offers i$eological F@stification for states to carry t!e CommerceBattering Ram.

*!e Commerce Battering Ramis a m@lti?@r?ose tool w!ic!, if itever s@ccee$s, could have?otentially far!

reaching implications . *!e rams@ltimate goal is to force a ret@rn to t!e #@?reme Co@rts ?re;ew

/eal Commerce Cla@seF@ris?r@$ence. The full repercussions ofwiping away the last

three "uarters of a century of Commerce Clausejurisprudence are difficult to f@lly

comprehend or ?re$ict. *!e #@?reme Co@rts Commerce Cla@se F@ris?r@$ence !as evolve$ in lig!t oftec!nological ?rogress, $evelo?ments in tra$e, an$ social transitions.9 #t is not solely theresult of a simplistic power struggle between the fed eral government and thestates. A ret@rn to ?re;ew /eal Commerce Cla@se F@ris?r@$ence co@l$ res@lt in reversal offe$eral c!il$ laor laws,8 significant im?lications for civil rig!ts, removal of fe$eral ans on loans!aring,G elimination of t!e oo$ an$ /r@g A$ministrations (&/A3>F@ris$iction over toacco ?ro$@cts,7

and radical transformation of the nation in almost every dimension of life and

business . Considering todays highly comple$ global economy and advanced

tech nologies, con$@cting a st@$y of t!e interrelate$ im?lications of a ret@rn tot!e #@?reme Co@rts ?re;ew /eal Commerce Cla@se F@ris?r@$encewould bea challenging@n$ertaing. 'f s@c! a st@$y !as evereen con$@cte$, we co@l$ not locate it.

%ndercutting Commerce Clause jurisprudence destroys economic leadershipprecludes effective responses to e$istential threats

&ilkinson 1'F@$ge on t!e Unite$ #tates Co@rt of A??eals for t!e o@rt! Circ@it(J. arvie, &Cry, t!e Belove$ Constit@tion3, !tt?-HHwww.nytimes.comH8


2/5

topple an e$haustively debated and duly enacted federal lawan$ to mae t!e $etermination t!att!e $ecision not to @y ice cream can e neatly severe$ from t!e $ecision to @y c!ocolate or vanilla.

#n curbing federal e$cess ( courts risk lessening our national economic

strength . *!at strengt! resi$es?artly int!e national as?ects of o@r fo@n$ing $oc@ment, among t!em t!enowmaligne$ commerce cla@se andt!e newly mistr@ste$ supremacy clause, w!ic! gives ?reference to

fe$eral over state laww!en t!ere is a conflict. #tates+ rig!ts are im?ortant in many s?!eres, @t thebenefits of a national economic policy must alsobe considered) * vibrant

economic order re"uires some political predictability , and the prospect of judges

striking down commercial regulation on ill!defined and subjectivebases is a

prescription for economic chaos t!at t!e framers, in a sim?ler time, !a$ t!e goo$ sense to !ea$

off.'t is tem?ting to s!o@t states+ rig!ts w!en $ee?ly flawe$ fe$eral legislation is enacte$, @t t!e momentary satisfactions of t!ateercise carry long;term constit@tional costs. Ba$ly conceive$ ills $ie a t!o@san$ ?olitical $eat!s in t!e a??ro?riations ?rocess,in t!e states, t!ro@g! electoral retri@tion, in t!e eec@tive a??ointments of a s@ccee$ing a$ministration an$ @ltimately in

amen$ment an$ re?eal. owever, if co@rts rea$ t!e Constit@tion in s@c! a way that it enables them to

make Congress ineffectual ( and instead to promote +0 state regulatory regimes in

an era of rapidly mounting global challenges , the risks should escape no

one . %aing o@r c!arter more ?aroc!ialwhile other nations fle$ their economic muscleseems lie ?oor timing.

%, economic power solves e$tinctionRic!ar$ . -aass 1., Presi$ent of t!e Co@ncil on oreign Relations, GH


3/5

worl$ . Everyone s!o@l$ !o?e t!at it $oes- *!e alternativeto a worl$ le$ y t!e U# is not a worl$ le$ y C!ina, E@ro?e, R@ssia,

Ja?an, 'n$ia, or any ot!er co@ntry,@trat!er a worl$ t!at is not le$ at all . #@c! a worl$ wo@l$ almost certainly e

c!aracterize$ y chronic crisis and conflict . *!at wo@l$ e a$ not F@st for Americans, @t for t!evastmaFority of t!e planet +sin!aitants.

/eturn to pre!ew eal Commerce Clause prevents effective terror response

2owers '?artner at @nter, #mit! an$ /avis(#cott, &C5%%ERCE ; A Retreat rom Clarity- *!e #@?reme Co@rt A$$s a 1rinle to t!e KAggregate$ EffectsK /octrine of itsCommerce Cla@se J@ris?r@$ence ; Unite$ #tates v. %orrison, 79 U.#. 7M (8


4/5

availaility an$ safety of t!e tec!nology,wit! a conc@rrent $imin@tion in t!e cost, vol@me, an$ tec!nicalnowle$ge reI@ire$ to o?erate it. *!@s, for eam?le,w!ereas fifty years ago ?ro$@cing large I@antities ofcertain c!emical wea?ons mig!t !ave een a $angero@s an$ inefficient affair reI@iring a large ?lant,e?ensive eI@i?ment, an$ several c!emical engineers, wit! t!e a$vent of c!emical microreactors, 7 t!esame ?rocesses mig!te accom?lis!e$ far more c!ea?ly an$ safely on a $esto? assemlage, ?@rc!ase$commercially an$ monitore$y a single c!emistry gra$ @ate st@$ent.*!e ra?i$ gloal s?rea$ an$increase$ @ser;frien$liness of many tec!nologiest!@s re?resents a?otentially ra$ical s!ift from t!e relativelysmall scale of !arm a single in$ivi$@al or small a@tonomo@s gro@? co@l$ !istorically ca@se. : rom t!e limite$reac! an$ illing ?ower of t!e swor$, s?ear, an$ ow, to t!e intro$@ction of $ynamite an$ event@ally t!e @se of o@r own

infrastr@ct@res against @s (as on #e?temer 99>, t!e n@mer of ?eo?le t!at an in$ivi$@al w!o was @ns@??orte$ y aroa$er ?olitical entity co@l$ ill wit! a single action !as increase$ from single $igits to t!o@san$s. 'n$ee$,it !as even een asserte$ t!at &over time S as t!e leverage ?rovi$e$ y tec!nology increases, t!is t!res!ol$ will

finally reac! its c@lminationwit! t!e aility of one man to $eclare war on t!e worl$ an$ win .3 N

ow!ere is t!is tren$ more ?erce?tile in t!e c@rrent age t!an in t!e area of @nconventional wea?ons.*!ese new tec!nologies $o not sim?ly em?ower @sers on a ?@rely tec!nical level. )loalization an$ t!e e?ansion ofinformation networs ?rovi$e new o??ort@nities for $isaffecte$ in$ivi$@als in t!e fart!est corners of t!egloe to ecome familiar wit! core wea?on conce?ts an$ to ?@rc!ase eI@i?mentonline tec!nical co@rses an$eBay are @n$o@te$ly a oon to wo@l$;e ?@rveyors of violence. @rt!ermore, even t!e most soli?sisticmisant!ro?es, ?eo?le w!o wo@l$ never e ale to f@nction socially as ?art of an o?erational terrorist gro@?, can fin$ra$icalizing infl@ences or legitimation for t!eir eliefs in t!e maelstrom of virt@al i$entities on t!e

'nternet.All of t!is can s?awn, it is feare$, a more $eleterio@s ree$ of lone actors , w!at !ave een referre$ to insome I@arters as &s@?er;em?owere$ [email protected] M Conce?t@ally, s@?er;em?owere$ in$ivi$@als are atomistic game;

c!angers, i.e., t!ey constit@te a single (an$ often sing@lar> in$ivi$@al w!o can s!oc t!e entire system (w!et!er

national, regional, or gloal>y relying only on t!eir own reso@rces . *!eir core c!aracteristics are t!at t!ey !ave s@?eriorintelligence, t!e ca?acity to @se com?le comm@nications or tec!nology systems, an$ act as an in$ivi$@al or a &lone;wolf.3 *!e en$res@lt, accor$ing to t!e ?essimists, is t!at if one of t!ese in$ivi$@als c!ooses to attac t!e system, &t!e @n?rece$ente$ nat@re of !is

attac ens@res t!at no co@nter;meas@res are in ?lace to ?revent it. An$ w!en !e stries, !is attac will not only ill massiveamo@nts of ?eo?le, @t also ?rofo@n$ly c!ange t!e financial, ?olitical, an$ social systems t!at govern mo$ern life.3 9< 't almost goes

wit!o@t saying t!at t!e same concerns attac! to small a@tonomo@s cells, w!ose memersO ca?ailities an$reso@rces can e comine$ wit!o@ta??recialy increasing t!e o?erational foot?rint ?resente$ tointelligence an$ law enforcement agencies seeing to $etect s@c! e!avior.1it! t!e ece?tion of t!e largest

tr@c or aircraft oms, t!e most liely means y w!ic! to accom?lis! t!is level of system ?ert@ration is t!ro@g! t!e

@se ofCBR agents as 1%/ . 5n t!e motivational si$e, t!erefore, lone actors an$ small a@tonomo@s cells

mayironicallye more liely to select CBR wea?ons t!an more estalis!e$ terrorist gro@?sw!o are@s@ally more conservative in t!eir tactical orientationeca@se t!e etreme asymmetry of t!ese wea?onsmay ?rovi$e t!e only s@Fectively feasile o?tion for s@c! actors to ac!ieve t!eir gran$iose aims of $ee?lyaffecting t!e system. *!e in!erent tec!nical c!allenges ?resente$ y CBR wea?ons may also mae t!em attractive to self;ass@re$ in$ivi$@als w!o may !ave a very $ifferent ris tolerance t!an larger, tra$itional terrorist organizations t!at mig!t !ave to econcerne$ wit! a variety of constit@encies, from state ?atrons to ?ros?ective recr@its. 99 %any ot!er factors eyon$ a &?erceive$?otential to ac!ieve mass cas@alties3 mig!t ?lay into t!e $ecision to ?@rs@e CBR wea?ons in lie@ of conventional e?losives, 98incl@$ing a fetis!istic fascination wit! t!ese wea?ons or t!e ?erce?tion of $irect referents in t!e wo@l$;e ?er?etratorOs eliefsystem.5t!ers are far more sang@ine ao@t t!e ca?ailities of lone actors (or in$ee$ non;state actors in general> wit! res?ect tot!eir ?otential for @sing CBR agents to ca@se mass fatalities, arg@ing t!at t!e arriers to a s@ccessf@l large;scale CBR attacremain !ig!, even in to$ayOs networe$, tec!;savvy environment. 9 /olni, for eam?le, arg@es t!at even t!o@g! !omegrown cellsare &less constraine$3 in motivations, more c!allenging ?lots generally !ave an inverse relations!i? wit! ca?aility, 9G w!ile %ic!ael"enney ca@tions against maing ?res@m?tions ao@t t!e ease wit! w!ic! in$ivi$@als can learn to ?ro$@ce viale wea?ons @sing only

t!e 'nternet. 97 owever, evenmost of t!ese ?@n$its conce$e t!at low;level CBR attacs emanating from t!isI@arterwill ?roaly lea$ to ?olitical, social, an$ economic $isr@?tion t!at eten$s well eyon$ t!e areas

imme$iately affecte$ y t!e attac. *!is raises an essential ?oint wit! res?ect to CBR terrorism-irres?ective of t!e !arm ?otential of CBR wea?ons or an actorOs ca?aility (or lac t!ereof> tos@ccessf@lly em?loy t!em on a catastro?!ic scale, t!ese wea?ons invarialy eert a stronger ?syc!ologicalim?act on a@$iencest!e essence of terrorismt!an t!e tra$itional g@n an$ om. *!is is s@rely not lost ont!ose lone actors or a@tonomo@s cells w!o are as intereste$ in getting notice$ as in ca@sing [email protected] Ca?aility an$ 'ntent1!ile legitimate $eate can e !a$ as to t!e level of ?otential t!reat ?ose$ y lone actors or smalla@tonomo@s cells wiel$ing CBR wea?ons, ?ossily t!e est arg@ment for engaging in a s@stantive eamination of t!e iss@e is t!e

most concrete one of allt!at t!ese actors !ave alrea$y $emonstrate$ t!e motivation an$ ca?aility to ?@rs@ean$ @se CBR wea?ons, in some cases even close to t!e ?oint of constit@t ing a gen@ine 1%/ t!reat. 'n t!econtet of ioterrorism, ?er!a?s t!e most cogent ill@stration of t!is is t!e case of /r. Br@ce 'vins, t!e ?er?etrator e!in$ one of t!e


5/5

most serio@s e?iso$es of ioterrorism in living memory, t!e 8

Documents

Battering Ram Da 1nc