Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything, without even touching the fact that Data privacy is in no way even close to any of the enumerated power of the US Federal Government
Federal Laws almost always favor large companies, the exact companies these laws are needed to protect the consumer from
Facebook, Microsoft, etc would love nothing more than to have the federal government take over because has "stake holders" they will be called on to write their own legislation, and will start the revolving door of hiring current, former and future regulators to work in the very corporations they are supposed to regulate.
I dont think government should be in the business of regulated interpersonal relationships at all, for the finances it should be covered by contract law, for everything else it is none of the government's business
I think the point GP is trying to make is that sometimes state governments try to get involved in marriage and having a federal policy that preempts that can prevent further meddling.
This cuts both ways—with preemption, you can provide baseline rights or guarantees to citizens. The trade-off is that you have federal legislation in the mix and you then need to deal with laws that are slower/harder to change; a big issue if the law was badly written or needs to be changed in a timely manner.
> without even touching the fact that Data privacy is in no way even close to any of the enumerated power of the US Federal Government
In what way is data privacy regulation for corporations not a regulation on interstate commerce? That's like, the whole deal. That's the entire internet. If anything, Internet regulations applying at the state level is even more insane, because of the inherently cross-state nature of globally networked communication.
Because the original concept of "interstate commerce" was trade disputes among the states.
Wickard that expanded that to include all commerce that may touch another state even indirectly was / is one of the WORST supreme court decision ever and it is eternal dream that the Supreme Court will reverse it and instantly shrink the power of federal government by at least 75%
> i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything
I'm not sure why anyone wants to be held to 50+ different and conflicting privacy and data protection requirements just to have a website or provide a service online because that's what we'd be getting if we left online privacy regulation up the states.
I dont, I want to be held to the standard of my State, for which I would have more control over than the federal government's one which is often influenced more greatly by states like NY, CA, TX or FL none of which I reside in an have no desire to live under either extreme's of those states
> I dont, I want to be held to the standard of my State,
that's not possible for people who do business with people who live in other states. If I make a website in Ohio I'm responsible for following Florida's laws on how I handle data collected from Florida's citizens.
If you never create a business or service that anyone from any other state or country uses you'll never have to worry about compliance with their laws, but most of us want to build things for more than just the people in our immediate surroundings.
>>If I make a website in Ohio I'm responsible for following Florida's laws on how I handle data collected from Florida's citizens.
Why? For decades in the US we have had the concept of "Nexus", and just because a person visits your website in Ohio from Florida does not you have a Nexus in FL to where you need to follow FL Law
Just like today if I put up a website, and a person from the EU visits it, I as a US Citizen with no business interests in the EU have no obligation to follow GDPR or put up cookie notices or any other EU Laws
Because the alternative is that businesses do for data privacy the same thing they already do for things like manufacturing and corporate taxes. That's even worse.
It's a lot easier for big business to control a single state government than all fifty of them.
> Just like today if I put up a website, and a person from the EU visits it, I as a US Citizen with no business interests in the EU have no obligation to follow GDPR or put up cookie notices or any other EU Laws
You'd possibly have an obligation under GDPR, but you are free to ignore that and face the consequences. Same with laws passed in other states. You're free to ignore them so long as you're fine with what ignoring them will cost you. If you enjoy being able to conduct business in and travel to places outside of your state it's probably a good idea not to violate the laws of those places.
Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything, without even touching the fact that Data privacy is in no way even close to any of the enumerated power of the US Federal Government
Federal Laws almost always favor large companies, the exact companies these laws are needed to protect the consumer from
Facebook, Microsoft, etc would love nothing more than to have the federal government take over because has "stake holders" they will be called on to write their own legislation, and will start the revolving door of hiring current, former and future regulators to work in the very corporations they are supposed to regulate.
Federal laws never work for the average citizen