Was this the reason this scumbag voted against concealed carry reciprocity?
No, probably just because he's read the constitution.
Oh, was what he read in the part giving the President the power to run car companies?
Bono, a Federal law mandating concealed carry reciprocity would be just as constitutional as for example a Federal law mandating that marriage reciprocity (i.e. States could be forced to recognize gay marriages). Neither proposed law would be constitutional though, as they both contravene the 10th Amendment.
As for GM and Chrysler, the Federal Government owning large chunks of them is at least as constitutional as owning shares in the Bank of the United States, and that issue was settled back in the 19th century. Indeed, as an exercise of the Bankruptcy Clause, it could be argued that it is on a stronger Constitution footing.
It would be constitutional under the full faith and credit clause. The proposed law would respect the public policy exception, since the two states that do not allow concealed carry would still not be required to recognize any permits.
