Jim Sensenbrenner: “the Supreme Court in Healy v. Beer Institute, 1989, elaborated on these principles concerning the extraterritorial…”

“the Supreme Court in Healy v. Beer Institute, 1989, elaborated on these principles concerning the extraterritorial effects as follows: ``The critical inquiry is whether the practical effect of the regulation is to control conduct beyond the boundaries of the State. The practical effect of the statute must be evaluated not only by considering the consequences of the law itself, but also by considering how the challenged law may interact with the legitimate regulatory regimes of other States and what effect would arise if one, but many or every, State adopted similar laws. Generally speaking, the Commerce Clause protects against inconsistent laws arising from the projection of one State regulatory regime into the jurisdiction of another State.'' So this bill is supported by sound federalism principles, there is a national interest involved, and that is why the amendment should be defeated.”