[Grover_Cleveland]

McCoy was prosecuted under federal law for taking a picture of herself naked with her daughter. According to the feds, federal courts have jurisdiction because the camera she used had been involved in interstate commerce. The Ninth Circuit rejected that argument.

This is great news. Even the Ninth Circuit is beginning to restrict the powers of Congress under the Commerce Clause. This is NOT a pro-porn ruling: the plaintiff can still be prosecuted under state law. It IS a move to restrict the federal government to something more like the powers the Framers intended.

[EBUCK]

It IS a move to restrict the federal government to something more like the powers the Framers intended.

Would be wonderful if it stood...won't tho. The SCOTUS will knock this thing down.

[Ancesthntr]

This is great news. Even the Ninth Circuit is beginning to restrict the powers of Congress under the Commerce Clause. This is NOT a pro-porn ruling: the plaintiff can still be prosecuted under state law. It IS a move to restrict the federal government to something more like the powers the Framers intended.

I have to second the motion that this is a great ruling. The CC has been used to deny liberties of all kinds, and to justify the expansion of federal power in innumerable ways for many decades. It is about time.

However, I can't eliminate that inner voice that is telling me that Reinhardt did this to protect the pornographer and NOT to reduce federal power. I wouldn't trust that @$$hole until Saddam Hussein converts to Judaism.

[RJCogburn]

The dreaded 9th comes up big! Good news.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

bttt

[gcruse]

The Tenth Amendment should have as much enforcement power as the First. Actually, it is just a burned out hole, now, as federalization has become second nature to both political parties. I wonder who has standing to sue for the resurrection of Tenth Amendment enforcement?

[Lurking Libertarian]

Unfortunately, I expect many "conservatives" to attack this ruling as "9th Circuit defends child porn."