←back to thread

Beginning 1 September, we will need to geoblock Mississippi IPs

(dw-news.dreamwidth.org)
295 points AndrewDucker | 3 comments | 27 Aug 25 20:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.452s | source
Show context
ggm ◴[28 Aug 25 02:50 UTC] No.45047804[source]▶
The USA has a F(ederal) CC. Not S(tate) CC.

I appreciate that not all modern post 1776 democracies are the same, but in Australia, whose constitution was informed hugely by the US constitution, Federal communications law takes supremacy over states, and states laws cannot constrain trade between the states. There are exceptions, but you'd be in court. "trade" includes communications.

So ultimately, isn't this heading to the FCC, and a state-vs-federal law consideration?

-Not that it means a good outcome. With the current supreme court, who knows?

replies(2): >>45047963 #>>45047989 #
1. Manuel_D ◴[28 Aug 25 03:15 UTC] No.45047963[source]▶
In theory, the US constitution forbids states from interfering with interstate commerce too.
replies(2): >>45047990 #>>45048029 #
2. ggm ◴[28 Aug 25 03:19 UTC] No.45047990[source]▶
<insert Yogi Berra quote about theory and practice here>
3. cobbzilla ◴[28 Aug 25 03:24 UTC] No.45048029[source]▶
In theory yes, but in reality the "Dormant Commerce Clause" is weak protection.

We've let states set their own "internet services" taxes, making selling anything online in the US a regulatory nightmare. A third-party vendor to manage (and keep up with) the tax laws to stay compliant is basically required for anyone selling online, or risk the wrath of various state tax bodies.