form and content of passports in furtherance of its enumerated powers”). Zivotofsky would have us stop there. He reasons that because Congress has the power to regulate passports and because Section 214(d) is passport legislation, the statute is constitutional. This argument, however, overlooks the independent limitations the Constitution imposes even on legislation within Congress’s enumerated powers. That is, a statute that Congress would otherwise have authority to enact may still run up against some independent restriction on its power. For example, the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate communications, but a communications statute may nevertheless run afoul of the First Amendment. See, e.g., Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844, 117 S.Ct. 2829, 138 L.Ed.2d 874 (1997) (<HOLDING>). The fact that Congress has affirmative
holding that uniteds lease provisions violated  4 of the sherman act recognizing first amendment retaliation right holding that antiindecency provisions of the communications decency act violated the first amendment holding that the countys permit fee violated the first amendment holding that same activity violated  2 of the sherman act