“giving local residents better rates at the expense of out of state customers”
Assuming this is true, I don’t get the point. Colleges and universities do that to this day, and rather than make them stop the feds subsidize them.
“argument...hinge(s) on the status of the railroad as a registered carrier of interstate commerce”
No, it hinges on the activity under the microscope—charging so and so for intrastate shipping—is “substantially related” to interstate commerce. You can say that’s so because they are interstate carriers, but not so. Because, like I said, they couldn’t regulate any old thing the railroad did. Only that which was substantially related to the carriers’ interstate commerce was regulatable.
Thusly did Shreveport inspire Wickard. It matters not at all that Filburn isn’t a registered interstate rail carried. Shreveport wouldn’t allow the feds to stop him from growing wheat even if he was. Ti qualify under Shreveport he’d have to be involved in interstate commerce, the activity itself would have to be commerce, and it would have to be substantially related to the interstate part if hid operation.
That is not consistent with the arguements presented in the decision. They state explicitly that their jurisdiction is over the actions of the railroad by virtue of their status as a registered carrier.
What you're telling me contradicts the plain language of the decision.