Reply #100: The primary conflict

[du_da]

with the commerce clause is the definition of interstate commerce, specifically that commerce that is intrastate is by definition not interstate. As you noted a previous SC decided gave way to the codified language for the sake of furthering the restructuring of the system at the time, thus setting a precedent that society held as valid for some time regardless of its conflict with the codified language. However, having a codified Constitution allows the current courts to ignore this decision if the original decision was not in line with the Constitution as it reads. Those arguing it is not legal would challenge the original decision on its legal merit and within our current system it is almost certain this argument would work. What we should be doing is looking to clarify the coded system to ensure the various branches and levels of government have the both the appropriate authority and desired limitations to enact the system of government we the people want in place.