[robertpaulsen]

"It is more likely that congressional leaders understood that they had no authority to ban the sales of liquor within a state."

Do you have anything to back this up?

The reason I ask is that the 21st amendment not only repealed the 18th (Section 1), but it also removed the power from the federal government and placed it exclusively with the states (Section 2).

Now, if the federal government did not have the power, why the need for Section 2? Just simply repeal the 18th, and that's it.

[BikerNYC]

Section two reads:

2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

This section gives states power over interstate commerce by allowing them to prohibit the importation of alcohol into the state. In effect, Congress is giving up some of its interstate commerce power to the states.

Is it your position that Congress can regulate the use of any product in any state for any purpose unless their is a constitutional provision directly prohibiting it from doing so (e.g. Second Amendment issues)?

[supercat]

Now, if the federal government did not have the power, why the need for Section 2? Just simply repeal the 18th, and that's it.

What exact power does the federal government give up in USC18.2?

Could any power that the federal government gives up in USC18.2 be construed as dealing with anything other than interstate commerce?