Except those powers within the Commerce Act were statutory laws about desegregation, and the case did not reach any Constitutional question.
Oh good grief. Where do you think the Interstate Commerce Clause is?
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution:
[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
That is where that decision is derived, where VAST amounts of constitutional law is derived.
So to argue that its not a Constitutional question when the Constitution is used as the basis for the decision? C’mon man…don’t go there.
I was referring to (as was the Wikipedia article on the case you brought up) the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, not the Commerce Clause in the Constitution. And as stated in the linked article, it avoied deciding any Constitutional questions in its decision.