3 ms·

Yea; interstate commerce being the domain of the federal government is one of the more tested legal concepts we have here.

• akersten 2mo ago
  hasn't stopped states from trying to impose their internet rules on visitors everywhere :/
• PaulDavisThe1st 2mo ago
  Just around, or slightly around the level of testing that Roe vs Wade prior to Dobbs. Or a bakers dozen of other established precedents that were "one of the more tested legal concepts" until ... recently.
  • pbh101 2mo ago
    Generally speaking, no: there’s a significant difference in precedent between the two. IANAL, but interstate commerce is explicitly written into the Constitution as the jurisdiction of the federal government and was tested (and generally serially expanded) in court multiple times long before Roe.
    • PaulDavisThe1st 2mo ago
      Birthright citizenship is explicitly written into the Constitution, yet about a month ago, 2 SCOTUS justices provided opinions and votes suggesting that this detail doesn't matter much.
      • vharuck 2mo ago
        4, actually. 3 voted to allow the executive order rescinding birthright citizenship. 1 voted against the order, but on the reasoning that it violated a law from the early 1900s, not the Constitution.
  • wildzzz 2mo ago
    Unfortunately for Roe v Wade, abortion and a right to privacy aren't explicitly laid out in the Constitution. Interstate commerce is. New York would be entirely in their right to ban Kalshi in New York but not halt operations nationwide.
• dlcarrier 2mo ago
  …And growing wheat on your own land to feed your own cattle somehow counts as interstate commerce, despite no commerce taking place and the wheat never leaving your property, let alone the state. (Wickard v. Filburn)
  • gamblor956 2mo ago
    Wickard was growing wheat for interstate commerce. The case was about whether the additional wheat he grew for "personal" use was also part of interstate commerce.
    • DangitBobby 2mo ago
      It was a creative ruling in multiple senses of the word. They invented the idea from whole cloth and it effectively created new laws from the bench. > The Court decided that Filburn's wheat-growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for animal feed on the open market, which is traded nationally, is thus interstate, and is therefore within the scope of the Commerce Clause. Although Filburn's relatively small amount of production of more wheat than he was allotted would not affect interstate commerce itself, the cumulative actions of thousands of other farmers like Filburn would become substantial. Therefore, the Court decided that the federal government could regulate Filburn's production. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
      • gamblor956 2mo ago
        No, they didn't invent the idea wholesale. There were similar issues dating back to the founding of the country. However nobody pays those any heed because it destroys the ideological claims they're trying to make.
        • DangitBobby 2mo ago
          > No Oh, okay. We'll just pretend this makes any fucking sense. Glad that's all cleared up!