On: MIT's first freshman class since affirmative-action ban is less diverse

[beaglesss]

In intrastate commerce I see no reason how the feds can constitutionally stop them.

[underseacables → beaglesss]

Banking. Money crosses state lines which makes it fair game under the commerce clause. There's only 50+ years of court cases on the subject.

[beaglesss → underseacables]

Yes under the commerce clause in recent history has been interpreted to mean interstate commerce is something as simple as growing a weed plant on your own land and smoking it.

The precious CRA is an oft cited law as to why we need expansive interpretation of that clause (as without it CRA as we know it would be finished), the sooner SCOTUS crushes the CRA the sooner we can finally crush the rest of the civil rights violating overreaches of the prior commerce clause interpretations.

[hackeraccount → underseacables]

By that logic is there anything that the Federal government can't regulate? If that's the case why is the commerce clause in the Constitution at all?