[tacticalogic]

Click on the link. Read as slowly as you like.

http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/cntrlsub/cntlsba.htm

"I write separately only to express my view that the very notion of a "substantial effects" test under the Commerce Clause is inconsistent with the original understanding of Congress' powers and with this Court's early Commerce Clause cases. By continuing to apply this rootless and malleable standard, however circumscribed, the Court has encouraged the Federal Government to persist in its view that the Commerce Clause has virtually no limits. Until this Court replaces its existing Commerce Clause jurisprudence with a standard more consistent with the original understanding, we will continue to see Congress appropriating state police powers under the guise of regulating commerce."

-Justice Clarence Thomas

[philman_36]

Ignore, ignore, ignore...

[tpaine]

I suspect roscoe is more of a Ginsburg groupie type.

Thomas's constitutionalism is not roscoes style.

[Roscoe]

I write separately only to express my view that the very notion of a "substantial effects" test under the Commerce Clause

CSA. Substantial and direct. Splat.