>the Commerce Clause refers to the role of the US federal government in
regulating interstate commerce (from the original constitution), right?
when was it reinterpreted in a relatively progressive way? what were the
political forces and struggles behind that reinterpretation?
This was the
On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Jim Devine wrote:
> At 01:20 PM 6/6/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >That is why the 1964 Civil Rights Act was authorized under the Commerce
> >Clause rather than the 14th Amendment, ...
>
> the Commerce Clause refers to the role of the US federal government in
> regulating interst
At 01:20 PM 6/6/00 -0400, you wrote:
>That is why the 1964 Civil Rights Act was authorized under the Commerce
>Clause rather than the 14th Amendment, ...
the Commerce Clause refers to the role of the US federal government in
regulating interstate commerce (from the original constitution), right
On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Jim Devine wrote:
> and even when we got the 14th, wasn't it interpreted to allow the rise of
> joint-stock corporations at the same time that Jim Crow laws were allowed
> to take hold?
Worse, it was specifically interpreted not to include the right of the
federal governme
