> The internet is an interstate "thing" where we can't even 100% say who is where so this kind of regulation absolutely violates federalist principles. Califor

> The internet is an interstate "thing" where we can't even 100% say who is where so this kind of regulation absolutely violates federalist principles. California regulation has affected people outside of the state since long before the internet. If that's enough to toss out federalist principles and to handcuff a state beyond constitutional justification, then federalism is quite weak. Your argument seems to be that federalism should be ignored here in order to protect the integrity of federalism. I'm not understanding how that works. BTW, I very much disagree with California's direction here. I moved out of the state after growing up and living there for 37 years because of this kind of policy making. But as a federalist I value their independence more than their correctness.