TexasCHLforum.com

RottenApple,

The case which is generally regarded as "the high watter mark" of the commerce clause is Katzenbach v. McClung, aka the Ollie's BBQ case. It involved a small BBQ restaurant several miles away from the nearest federally funded highway. Skipping ahead, the court held that the impact of this obscure restaurant on interstate travel and commerce (and involving civil rights which are not a commerce clause issue, but are broader in scope, were sufficient, though rather indirectly due to the sales of products involved in interstate commerce (e.g. The catsup on the table) to have an effect upon interstate commerce. Some subsequent cases involved "instrumentalities of interstate commerce", such as telephone communications, whereas some of the current challenges to the assertion of federal jurisdiction involve the manufacture of firearms wholly within a particular state for sale only to the residents of that state are based upon the belief of many observers that Katzenbach would not.be similarly decided before the court today.

I have not recently read the case you cite, but most farm crop price support cases involve the fact that the complainant subjects himself to federal jurisdiction by participation in the federal program.

Only time will tell whether the S.Ct will rule based upon the law or political expediency which has been shown in a number of recent cases.

Cheers

Actually, there is an interesting question whether the Feds have legislative jurisdiction over wholly intrastate sales between private individuals (those not holding an FFL). The Federal nexus, if there is one at all, would be thinner than a sheet of paper.

With respect to Sen. Cornyn, his remarks to the TSRA Annual Meeting were fully supportive of our 2nd Amendment rights, as were those of Texas Atty Gen Greg Abbott.

I, for one, would be more interested in seeing a few state and federal representatives from Houston replaced.