Reply To: question for competent lawyers and anyone else who knows law

UJM, 2 ways:
1. the commerce is not restricted. it is reasonable to assume that no one will refrain from flying due to a pants requirement. Many do refrain because of the mask mandate.
2. there is “a clear and present danger” to walking around unclothed. Not a physical danger, but a sociological danger. I don’t know if this danger is legally recognized or not, but it certainly is a difference.

PCR tests still are unconstitutional.
@CTL under what grounds does the federal government have a right to interfere with air commerce? Is it because they own the airspace?