|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 18:58:47 -0500 (CDT) From: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> Cc: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>, cypherpunks@cyberpass.net In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970620151503.19203A-100000@well.com> Reply-To: Mac Norton <mnorton@cavern.uark.edu> On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Steve -- Believe it or not, yes, state Net-gambling laws could fall under > the dormant commerce clause and be struck down by courts. If they ruled > consistently. I suspect they won't. Congress has traditionally accorded states wide latitude in regulating gambling, nor is gambling yet recognized by Congress as legitimate commerce, generally speaking. It's still regarded as criminal behavior. State murder laws are not unconstitutional on the ground that contracts for killing are made ikn interstate commerce.:) MacN So, the dormant CC may not apply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |