Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by btilly 4864 days ago
Is Square even in Illinois?

If not, then can someone explain to me how Illinois has the power to enforce this statute? I am not a lawyer, but it would seem to me to be a pretty clear case of interstate commerce, which is under federal jurisdiction.
3 comments
tptacek 4864 days ago
IIRC money transfers are regulated as banking activities, not interstate commerce.

Every US state seems to have a variant of these rules; for instance, here's every license Paypal needs to operate:

https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm

link
sophacles 4864 days ago
This makes a certain amount of sense. If I, as a resident of Illinois, purchase a coffee from my locally owned and operated shop, we could suddenly get around in state regulations just by processing the payment via a medium that includes a different state, e.g. square, or writing a check from a bank with branches not in IL.
link
dsl 4864 days ago
The Commerce Clause grants powers to Congress, it does not limit the powers of states.

If someone uses Square to accept a payment or receive the benefit of a payment within the state, they can regulate it. If Square disagrees or believes the law is unjust, they can cease business in the state, or file a lawsuit against the state.

link
tptacek 4864 days ago
I don't think that's true; if you Google "dormant commerce clause", you'll see why. State laws restricting interstate commerce have to have a legitimate interest for that particular state and their interference with interstate commerce has to be outweighed by their benefit.
link
dsl 4864 days ago
My point still stands that its up to the state to make the determination, not you or I. Obviously they feel that Square is doing something that they can regulate.
link
DenisM 4864 days ago
It's not up to the state. Supreme cour often overrides state laws on the grounds that they interfere with interstate commerce.

Also, the "not you or I" part was unnecessary.

link
anigbrowl 4864 days ago
Not really. See Gonzales v. Raich for an exegesis of commerce clause jurisprudence. This is one of those cases where I think Justice Thomas' argument is correct, but that would require overturning Wickard v. Filburn, a landmark case. These cases aren't about banking specifically, more about the reach of the federal government.
link
rayiner 4864 days ago
A state can assert jurisdiction over any entity that does business in the state.
link