“And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822
It is exactly because Congress's authority to do that IS doubtful that a number of states have acted. There is no question that states have inherent authority to prohibit discrimination--including discrimination based on sexual orientation--in their public accommodations laws. The issue before the Supreme Court in its decisions on those laws has not been the states' authority to enact them, but whether they violated some First Amendment freedom.
When Justice O'Connor distinguished between commercial and expressive associations in her concurring opinion in Roberts v. Jaycees, she was talking about how far a state, in that case Minnesota, could go to prevent discrimination in various public accommodations by law without violating the freedom of association. Nothing either she or the majority said had anything to do with whether Congress has power under the Commerce Clause to prohibit discrimination in public accommodations based on sexual orientation.
"Michigan Car Repair Shop Owner Says He Will Turn Away Openly Gay Customers"
com one come all, calling all bigots! I love this! I said many times and Ill say it again, don't these mentally retarded bigoted morons know that in the end they are simply helping equal rights win, just like bannings did?? So awesome, I love the sweet sweet irony!
I asked you to tell us where the Supreme Court has ever suggested Congress's power to regulate commerce "among the several states" includes the power to prohibit discrimination in public accommodations based on sexual orientation. You claimed the federal government has authority to do that, but you cannot explain where that authority comes from.