If I may, I think the Senator is going to find this case going to the Supreme Court in a year or two--the sooner the better, as far as I am concerned. I don't know how the Court will rule, but I can understand why attorneys general would be arguing that requiring someone to do something to create activity is probably a real stretch of the commerce clause. Where does it end? There are two sides to that legal coin. My point is, I doubt if the attorneys general of these States, who are mostly elected--or I am sure all of them are elected--would be bringing a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality if they believed their constituents were really for the bill. Does that make sense to my colleague, that 26 attorneys general would be suing the Federal Government in court if they believed their own citizens felt as though this were the right way to go?
On the recordFebruary 7, 2011
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
The speaker discusses the potential Supreme Court case regarding the constitutionality of a federal bill.
Share
More from Lindsey Graham
Jun 26, 2026
Momentum and support continues to grow for our legislation to not only protect, but provide recourse to the victims—many of whom are women and children—of nonconsensual, sexual deepfakes. The DEFIANCE Act gives these victims a voice, and I…
Jun 10, 2026
I am grateful this was a decisive win. It's the most challenged I've ever been in terms of money, and the most challenged I've ever been in terms of the garbage thrown at me.
Jun 9, 2026
I think there should be consequences to cities and states that undercut federal law.
Jul 14, 2026
I can’t die now. I still need to do the Russia sanctions, get Iran sorted out and do Israeli-Saudi normalization.





