Theoretically, what makes a burlesque performance a constitutionally protected form of "speech" vs. any other service that the state can regulate? There are tens of thousands of laws on the books about what businesses can and can't do, what licenses they need, and what products are services are forbidden to be sold, or how they may be sold, or how they must be labeled, or even when they can be sold. For examples states saying you can't buy or sell booze before 7am on Monday. That's constitutional. (even though commerce is regulated by Congress) What about strip clubs? Why can the state regulate nude dancers? They exclusively perform in explicitly adults-only venues, and there are still laws about what time they can take place, what they must wear, whether alcohol can be served on site, and probably many more we wouldn't even imagine. What is different about this law?
Theoretically, what makes a burlesque performance a constitutionally protected form of "speech" vs. any other service that the state can regulate? There are tens of thousands of laws on the books about what businesses can and can't do, what licenses they need, and what products are services are forbidden to be sold, or how they may be sold, or how they must be labeled, or even when they can be sold. For examples states saying you can't buy or sell booze before 7am on Monday. That's constitutional. (even though commerce is regulated by Congress) What about strip clubs? Why can the state regulate nude dancers? They exclusively perform in explicitly adults-only venues, and there are still laws about what time they can take place, what they must wear, whether alcohol can be served on site, and probably many more we wouldn't even imagine. What is different about this law?
Wickard v Filburn remains one of the worst rulings in USA history.