Your unsupported conclusion carries little weight.
A reasonable view of the original intent of the CC was the limited right for the feds to remove hindrances to smooth commerce between states.
Interfering with state union laws has nothing to do with remove hindrances to commerce between states, nor has the growth of most of the federal government been justified by the CC or any other part of the Constitution.
I don’t know what you’re doing on FR. You are a good Leftist justifying the unconstitutional growth of the federal government for the past 100+ years.
Unions don’t have any impact on interstate commerce?? Sure the Teamsters don’t impact interstate commerce or the Railroad unions, even the Steel Works, Airline pilots and mechanics? In what world? Contracts that cover the whole nation?
Certainly the language of the clause implies as much federal involvement with internal commerce as it can have with external commerce. Federal power was increased by the ratification of the constitution, not diminished under any reading.
How does describing a situation or history mean I approve of it? False claims as to some unanimity among the writers need to be addressed as does the idea that federal power was diminished by the constitution comparatively to the states.
Screaming that everything you don’t approve of is “Leftist” does no good. As a representative republic the opinion of the people has supported the Court and the growth of federal power. Only within the last few decades has Court appointments even been considered important.
We do not have a problem with a grasping federal government but with the People who have voted for and approved this power grab.