Final answer:
The statement is true because of the Commerce Clause, which allows federal regulation of economic activities that could substantially affect interstate commerce, even if they're not directly involved with interstate trade, as interpreted in landmark Supreme Court cases.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement, 'The Pines, a small motel in central Georgia, may be subject to federal regulation even though it is not close enough to the state borders to have many guests from other states', is true. This is due to the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. Although The Pines may not serve many guests from out-of-state, its operations could still affect interstate commerce in various ways, such as through the purchase of goods that have moved across state lines or by participating in economic activity that influences the interstate market for lodging. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Commerce Clause, particularly in cases like Wickard v. Filburn and Gonzales v. Raich, shows a broad understanding of the interstate commerce that extends to activities that may not be directly involved in interstate movement but can still have a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce.