10th Amendment and Internet Gambling Bill

[Wynton]

Stormy,

Courts have made it clear that the federal government can regulate, among other things, restaurants, pursuant to its commerce clause authority. Tell me why you think they could regulate restaurants, but not casinos?

[stormy455]

First, I'm not a lawyer and don't have any specific cases to back me up. What follows is my opinion, FWIW.

What sort of regulations are we talking about? Minimum Wage? Environmental? OSHA? Workplace Rules? Employment Discrimination? Most of those are fairly broadbrush and apply to larger businesses (including casinos), though as I said the definition of Interstate Commerce has been warped over the years by the courts, IMO. The feds have not really gotten into the business of regulating specific industries within states. I think there would be a serious court challenge if they tried that. I'm not saying that it would be slam dunk win for the states, but I think it's also far from "no question" that the feds have the authority. This supreme court has sort of limited the feds authority under the Interstate Commerce Clause. Though they did rule that growing marijuana for personal use constitutes interstate commerce [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] . Should the states prevail, I'm pretty sure that if Congress really wanted to regulate casinos (or any other local business) they could set up guidelines and threaten to withhold funds if the states don't comply (see the old 55 mph speed limit, and 21 minimum drinking age).

[Mr.K]

[ QUOTE ]
Look, regulating an activity is one thing, and banning it is another. What I said was that there is no question that the federal government could invoke its commerce clause authority to regulate casinos.

Even under the commerce clause, the legislation needs to be somewhat rationally related to the legislative goal. Thus, an outright ban may be harder to justify.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.