View Single Post
Old October 9, 2013, 05:13 PM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
I'm still not clear. If Interstate Commerce is the sole domain of the US Congress, and the Constitution says it is- I can understand California being able to do the "Made in California and never having left California" dance like the nullification laws from a bit ago tried to do, but I don't understand how they can ban something made in another state, allowed in that state (and the US as a whole to prevent the Pot comparison with WA and CO legalizing it) to me it just screams the Miller Decision. They took a Short Barreled shotgun across state lines and triggered the Interstate Commerce clause. How does the State of California get around a case directly on point where the State (in this case the Federal Government) claimed taking a firearm across State Lines was interstate commerce?

Edit to Add- I can also see California being able to prohibit THEIR citizens from purchasing in another state and bringing them home- But a resident of Arizona, buying in Arizona, and taking a vacation in San Diego... that's gotta be Interstate Commerce not?
JimDandy is offline  
Page generated in 0.03713 seconds with 7 queries