Drewthetexan wrote:sjfcontrol wrote:Also, the feds claim that any manufacture within the state affects inter-state commerce as it reduces the demand on out-of-state products. Thus EVERYTHING is regulate-able (?) by them.
I've been wondering about this myself. If, in context,
growing your own grain is illegal because it affects interstate commerce, how could this possibly withstand the SCOTUS without them overturning precedent? I expect the commerce clause is going to shut these laws down.
I heard somewhere not too long ago (Gun Talk?) that by the time this gets to SCOTUS there will be an "emerging consensus" among the States that will make it easier to overturn the Filburn precedent. If more and more states keep passing this type of legislation, and that growing list of states keep appealing the lower courts overturning of those laws, SCOTUS would not be able to ignore it as easily as if it was just, say, Montana appealing. When that court action begins, it is hard to say, but not likely until after several more states pass it.
If you have 15-20 states (or more) who have passed nullification, and they are all pushing back on the same point (Filburn or related commerce-clause precedent), then the court cannot brush it off as a minor thing, but have to take it seriously.
Not that the Supremes ever brush off a case. Well except for Michael Newdow's no-basis suit against the Pledge of Allegiance a while back.
