While I definitely agree that slippery slope is a real thing and not a fallacy, I'm not sure about it in this case. From everything I've read, courts are mostl

While I definitely agree that slippery slope is a real thing and not a fallacy, I'm not sure about it in this case. From everything I've read, courts are mostly very practical minded and make the narrowest decision possible given the facts of the case. Legal precedent has given rise to nutsy stuff like massive federal power expansion and the entire DEA being based off of the ICC in Wikard v. Filburn [1], that stands out as an exception to me. Normally these things are pointed and decided based on narrow and concrete circumstances. It's generally bad headlines (like this one) that sensationalize them. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn