.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
Just thought you might like to know what the federal government is doing on your behalf, how the feds are spending your tax dollars on a crazy-sounding lawsuit.
The dispute pits a South Dakota farm family, the Fosters, against the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The fight is over a mud puddle. Yep, you read that right. Said mud puddle is located smack in the middle of prime farmland.
The USDA has decreed the family may not fill in the muddy patch to plant more crops because it considers the .08 acre of land to be federally protected under the 1985 Swampbuster Act, which protects wetlands. No matter that the Fosters’ puddle is not connected to any waterway and is not near any other officially designated wetlands property. According to their lawyer, if the family dares to tamper with the puddle they will lose access to crop insurance and other federal programs designed to help American farmer
the taxation powers of the constitution. joining me now republican senator mike lee of utah, former law clerk for now supreme court justice samuel a hraoet too. alito. welcome back to the program. there was a split among conservatives, some defending chief justice roberts, saying he did write and opinion that reviewed to expand commerce powers. other folks are saying you re looking at the wrong sections of the opinion. if you look at what the court actually held, it is basically an expansive power without limit upped the taxation powers of the congress. that is exactly right, megyn, and that s why it s concerning to so many people who love liberty in america. people who understand that the government exists to serve the people, and not the other way around. this is yet another example of a supreme court facilitating the unfettered expansion of congress power. congress was as you remember,