Hacker News Reader

Comment by js2 | Hacker News Reader

We should have Federal solar access laws. It's especially pathetic this is in D.C. It sounds like they bowed to pressure though:

https://positivechangepc.com/uncategorized/dc-will-now-allow...

View on HN

>>We should have Federal solar access laws

Why Federal? Under which Constitutional Authority would such a Federal law be placed?

Frankly a HUGE part of the problem we have today, including the ever increasing division is the federal government expansion in areas (like property use) never envisioned or authorized by the US Constitution

So no we do not need a federal solar access law.

stepping in to protect on issues of liberty and property is of course under constitutional authority

Which Amendment, or Power in Article 1 Section 8 is "protect on issues of liberty and property"

I am missing that from my copy? 10th Amendment would clearly put that in the power of the States.

Remember the people and States created the LIMITED federal government for specific purposes not to be all powerful and all encompassing

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Sorry try again, 14th simply puts the same limits on state governments as the federal government, granting the people (all people) the more rights under their states then previously allowed since the federal constitution only applied to the federal government

The 14th amendment DID NOT expand the power of the federal government, it simply grated the federal courts authority to strike state laws using the federal constitution

No where in the 14th amendment does it claim what you imply

section 5 explicitly states

> The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Ok, I am still waiting for where in the section would give the federal government the power to mandate solar power access?

Let’s flip it. How do localities have the authority to prevent property owners to put solar on their own property? Why do local bullies have authority to remove freedom, but the state or feds don’t have the authority to protect freedom?

Nonsensical.

The tenth amendment to the US Constitution says that all powers not explicitly granted to the federal government are reserved to the states and the people.

So, under the US Constitution, state and local authorities can enact laws that the federal government cannot do anything about. The state governments absolutely have the power to prevent local governments from restricting the installation of solar panels.

Wait, what about “the people” part? The people just don’t have rights as long as there’s a local bully that wants to remove them? That doesn’t seem consistent or reasonable.

See my comment above.

Are you familiar with the Slaughterhouse cases?

In our federalist system, outside the power granted to the federal government by the constitution, the State governments hold the most power

So a local government would have to be granted regulatory authority over solar by the State government, which could also remove that authority.

State governmental power are dictated by the State Constitutions, those things that people have largely forgotten about has a federal government as swallowed more and more power and authority. Each State has it own binding constitution granting it authority and powers over the people of that State.

Commerce clause.

Sunlight crosses state lines, to boot.

> Under which Constitutional Authority would such a Federal law be placed?

The Commerce Clause. Same thing that authorizes the Communications Act of 1996 and FCC OTARD rules.

I would actually love for Congress to try that, it would give the Supreme Court a prime opportunity to Roll back the commerce clause or even completely undo Wickard like they did Roe...

I would love beyond all measure to see Wickard reversed

never envisioned or authorized by the US Constitution

Oh FFS. It's not religion, that's why it includes an amendment process. Constitutional fetishists are as bad as Marxists, having some good long-lasting principles is not the same as being right about everything and isn't a good excuse to overlook centuries' worth of additional insights because they don't fit neatly into the original codebase.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com