Some state constitutions are very explicit in terms of exactly what the state can and can’t do. The end result is the document ends up very long and requires frequent amendments. Texas has a constitution like this. This past fall there was a statewide election on a number of amendments to the state constitution…a few were legitimately “interesting”, but most were on the order of “Why do we need a constitutional amendment for this?”. Seemed a waste of effort on the part of the state to hold an election in a year where no state-wide positions were up for a vote.
Well, yeah. Since the New Deal that’s what they have been saying.
Or the opposite side, health care relates to interstate commerce in a substantial way, so Congress can regulate it. Maybe if I wasn’t so worried about getting sick elsewhere, I would travel more?
I’m on your side in this whole debate, but I can’t see this being anything other than a dunk in court. I would be surprised if SCOTUS even heard it.