Myths about American politics...

[Nym90]

Nathan, anyone who says that their background has nothing to do with their beliefs is kidding themselves. That's not a bad thing; your perspective is no more or less valid than anyone else's, and Al's implied ad hominem wasn't really productive here, but I do think your position is highly naive of the reality that existed in the US circa 1964.

The CRA is the textbook example of why government regulation of commerce is necessary and proper. One of the purposes of the Constitution (as outlined in the Preamble) is to provide for the general welfare of the people; the entire rest of the document was constructed specifically as a means of achieving the goals laid out there, and thus the Constitution should be read through that lens.

Any interpretation of its text must keep this in mind IMO. It would be extremely difficult to argue that the overall liberty of the people as a whole was reduced by the CRA.

[Nym90]

The Constitution was crafted to be a living document. It was left deliberately vague in many cases due to the fact that the Framers had the foresight to realize that they couldn't possibly know what specific issues would arise in the future--and which issues that at the time seemed vital would later fade to obscurity (the 3rd Amendment comes to mind here).

But the general principles to be upheld were laid out, and the rest of the document is a guide as to how to achieve them; but when we disagree about how to best achieve those principles, the proper place to resolve those disagreements is at the ballot box, not in the courts. IMO the courts should only intervene when Constutitional princples are being clearly violated by the law.