Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Dec 4, 02:38
2: Dec 3, 14:19
3: Dec 3, 11:17
4: Dec 3, 07:33
5: Dec 2, 17:22
6: Dec 2, 11:48
7: Dec 2, 08:21
8: Dec 1, 17:33
9: Dec 1, 11:23
10: Nov 30, 15:54
11: Nov 30, 09:41
12: Nov 29, 16:44
13: Nov 29, 08:01
14: Nov 28, 16:19
15: Nov 28, 09:42
16: Nov 27, 18:07
17: Nov 27, 12:04
18: Nov 27, 08:26
19: Nov 26, 18:06
20: Nov 26, 12:05
Posts: 155
In response to
"
The real question is does a state have authority to control what it’s residents see and have access to on the internet or is it a Federal issue? -- (link)
"
by
Pippy
intra-state, yes. inter-state . . . no but it's complicated -- (link)
Posted by
hollywood big shot (aka pickmix)
Apr 14 '23, 18:13
(No message)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dormant_Commerce_Clause
(en.wikipedia.org)
Responses:
Thank you. I learned some things.
-
Pippy
Apr 14, 18:55
3
don't feel bad. most lawyers (or judges) don't even know how the implied commerce clause really works -- nm
-
hollywood big shot
Apr 14, 18:58
2
I was happy I could follow along with most of it
-
Pippy
Apr 14, 19:05
The infield fly rule of interstate law? -- nm
-
Beryllium
Apr 14, 19:02
(one more reason “states” as sovereign entities within a national government is bad for business) -- nm
-
hollywood big shot
Apr 14, 18:22
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.
