Wow. You've got it exactly inside out. The Constitution tasks the federal government with ensuring that states provide equal protection and don't use economic regulation to violate our rights. This is exactly where the Commerce clause applies. But we're not 'applying' it.
The federal government uses the 'commerce clause' as its justification for regulating citizen v. citizen interactions. And that justification is a heaping load of horse shit. Interstate commerce doesn't mean intra state commerce.
Agreed. The federal mandate is to prevent states from interfering with national trade via bullshit tariffs and other barriers.
Agree again, but the 14th demands equal protection, and granting special rights and privilege violates that in spades.Intrastate commerce is the exclusive domain of the State to regulate.
If a State wants to place PA laws, they have every authority to. If they choose not to, they don't have to.
And the feds have the responsibility to ensure they're are protecting equal rights. PA laws violate the fuck out of equal rights.
Though I agree with you on one point. If they do set up PA laws and then explicitly exempt gays and lesbians, the Feds can get them on equal protection violations. That's the very basis of Romer V. Evans.
And if they exempt fat people and poor people or smelly people or dumb people are ugly people or etc, etc, etc, .....?