Re: California anti-spam law

From: Dan L Burk <BURKDANL[_at_]shu.edu>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 15:20:05 -0400

On 09/30/98, Kaye Caldwell <kaye[_at_]ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/29/98, Christopher A. Mohr <chrismohr[_at_]sprintmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Wouldn't state anti-spam legislation be a violation of the commerce
> > clause?
>
> NO, certainly not in the absence of federal legislation. This is well
> established.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding Kaye's response here, but to I believe it is incorrect. Federal legislation is not required for dormant commerce analysis. She may be thinking of statutory preemption, which is a different matter altogether.

---

Dan L. Burk
Seton Hall University
burkdanl[_at_]shu.edu

---

Received on Fri Oct 02 1998 - 19:10:05 GMT