The word "interstate" does not exist in the text of the Constitution.

There's arguably some merit to your position, but the argument that some case law is invalid because it doesn't meet the definition of a term defined in other case law is circular and incoherent.

▲

codexb 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It uses the phrase “regulate commerce between the states” which effectively has the same meaning.

▲

torstenvl 2 hours ago | parent [-]

No. It absolutely does not use that language, and it baffles me as to what would cause you to say that it does.

Please endeavor to say only true things.

▲

bsimpson 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

You're working awfully hard to be pedantic without comparing the actual language:

> to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause

	▲	torstenvl 14 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It's morally repugnant that you think expecting honesty is "pedantic."

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]