Originally Posted by Slothrop
Much of what you just wrote makes little or no sense and is predicated on a great deal of misunderstanding.
Lopez delineates the three things that Congress can regulate under its Commerce Clause power. As stated. Boxing falls under #3: it is an activity that has a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
To clear up a bit of your misunderstanding: The facts of the Lopez case involved what the Court found to be activity that did not substantially impact interstate commerce, toting a gun in a school zone. which is why the law in question failed (the 1990 Gun-Free School Zone Act). It didn't fit under any of the three categories. Boxing clearly does.
Well, right now we have a sad state of affairs. It is a race to the bottom to lure in the least scrupulous promoters.