[RockinRight]

My opinion on this law is clearly presented further up the thread.

However, since the Second Amendment clearly states that no state shall pass a law banning arms.

There is no such provision for sex toys. I think the law is stupid and a perfect example of nanny-state bullsh*t, but Constitutionally, I think the SCOTUS was correct here.

Let Alabama be backwards and repressed if they choose to.

[Clemenza]

True, but it would have no teeth were it not for the 14th, which clarified that all rights guaranteed by the constitution were applicable to individuals at the state and local level as well. The "State Rights" crowd have made the argument in the past that the constitution only applies to the Federal level, while conveniently ignoring the incorporation clause of the 14th.

Even under the commerce clause, however, it would be difficult for the court to rule otherwise in this case. Besides, this will prove impossible to enforce. The state of Florida passed a similar ban on pornography in the 1980s (freepers, correct me if I'm wrong) but outside of isolated cases, it has never been enforced.

[najida]

“Alabama-— We don’t think toys or fun should have anything to do with sex.”