CC Breadth and "Indirect" Limit Flashcards
CC has ___ limits on what Congress can do so maybe best for __
no real, branches to fight over
Why do corporations want interstate commerce expanded defintion?
don’t want to deal with bunch of dif state laws
Why do we need some limits on CC?
otherwise federalism no longer, fed not govt of limited powers
CC one area where SCOTUS has taken a ___ and ___
hands off approach, bowed to popular will
Originalist thinking about CC and N&P
important to understand notions of state govt at the time
Courts want to let the federal govt ____ BUT don’t want Congress to have ____
“do good things”/be effective, general police power, undermine federalism
Comstock shows that Courts often favor interest in ___ over ___
letting feds do right thing, preventing gen police power/state sovereignty
1st broad category that Congress may regulate under CC
use of channels of interstate commerce (Darby, Heart of Atlanta motel)
2nd broad category that Congress may regulate under CC
instrumentalities of interstate commerce even though the threat may come only from intrastate activities (Shreveport)
3rd broad category that Congress may regulate under CC
activities having a substantial relation to interstate (jones)
Raich held that CC ___
covers marijuana grown for personal use
Lopez held that CC __
does not cover guns in schools
Jones Court said that CC allows Congress to facilitate interstate commerce by ___
eliminating potential obstructions and restrict it by eliminating potential stimulants
In Lopez and Morrison, the court rejected the argument that Congress may regulate ___
noneconomic activity based solely on the effect that it may have on interstate commerce through a remote chain of inferences
Interstate Commerce used to be a question of doctrine but now because of ___ it is a one of _____ so ____
substantial effects standard, economics, defer to Congress
Modern approach to CC is to ____
equate commerce and economics (meaning unstable however fixed it may look)
Thomas concurrence in Lopez
substantial effect if taken to its logical extreme would give Congress police power over all aspects of American life
Hamburger: If the Consti intended the CC to include anything with a substantial effect on interstate commerce, much of __
enumerated powers in 1,8 would be superfluous
What’s at stake in CC (7)
avoiding concentration of power, localized self-govt, geographic diversity, competing sovereignties, protect for individual rights, negative liberty, policy experimentation
Gonzales O’Connor dissent
enforce outer limits of CC authorityt to protect historic spheres of state sovereignty from fed encroachment
Garcia, Powell dissent
fed civil servants may have little to no knowledge of States and localities affected by their rules, also not accessible to people living there
Under Gonzalez, Congress can act to ___
make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper to regulate commerce
The dilemma presented by N&P is that it can be construed to ___
permit almost anything or add nothing to other congressional powers but it does not seem to fit easily into any inbetween position
McCulloch potential middle ground for N&P
does not license exercise of any “great substantive and independent powers” beyond what is specifically enumerated
Prinz and Sebelius say that proper at least means that ___
NP clause not a justification to do something unconstitutional
Hamburger opinion on “proper”
doesn’t justify admin state since it cannot justify moving around powers
Wickard facts
Under Act designed to mitigate grain glut, farmers allocated ceiling on wheat they could grow even for own uses
Wickard holding
aggregation principle - can aggregate intrastate activity to discern if substantial effect (look at all homegrown wheat and not just one farmer?
Question Wickard raises
what can’t Congress regulate
Wickard reasoning
well established that commerce includes power to regulat4e prices and practices affecting such prices
Heart of Atlanta facts
Motel accessible by interstate highways, 75% patrons out of town, refusing to rent rooms to Black peopel after civil rights act
Heart of Atlanta holding
Commerce includes power to regulate local incidents (including local activities) which might have substantial and harmful effect on that commerce
H of A reasoning 1
determinative tests are whether commerce concerning more States than one + substantial relation to national interest
H of A reasoning 2
discrimination impedes Black interstate travel
Hamburger note on H of A
important not for CC but for Civil Rights reasons ,falls well within doctrine at time (business is instrumentality) and since medieva traditional power to regulate highways
Lopez facts
federal offense to possess firearm in school zone
Lopez holding
exceeds CC, not economic activity that might have substantial effect on interstate
Lopez reasoning 1
regulating guns in schools doesn’t fit into any of three categories
Lopez reasoning 2
criminal statute nothing to do with commerce or economic enterprise
Lopez reasoning 3
no Jdx element that would ensure through case by case inquiry that firearm in possession affects interstate
Lopez reasoning 4
Government “cost of crime” argument is slippery slope, would give general police power
Lopez note 1
interstate commerce not unlimited category (but don’t describe limits well)
Lopez note 2
not overturning CC, more of a drafting guide make Congress say magic words
After Lopez, Congress amended statute to say __
unlawful to possess firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate commerce
What is danger of expanding CC?
effectively given Congress a general police power
why is NP and CC doctrine unstable?
fact that there are no real limits invites litigation to define the limits
Gonzalez facts
CA law permits medicial marijuana but DEA destroys pot plants
Gonzalez holding
Application of CSA prohibition to interstate growers of marijuana did not exceed CC since rationally related to regulation of interstate commerce
Gonzalez reasoning 1
similar to Wickard, can regulate activity not itself commercial (not for sale) if conclude failure to regulate would undercut regulation of interstate market in that commodity
Gonzalez reasoning 2
production of commodity meant for home consumption has substantial effect on demand in national market since could enter illicit market
Gonzalez reasoning 3
need not determine if respondent activities in aggregrate substantially, only whether rational basis exists for so concluding
Gonzalez reasoning 4
Unlike Lopez and Morrison, activities regulated by CSA are economic
Why is rational basis bar used in Gonzalez?
economic decision that judges don’t want to make, okay as long as logical nexus
Comstock facts
fed statute authorizing district court to order civil commitment of federally incarcerated individual if they have serious mental illness that makes them sexually dangerous to others
Comstock holding
Congress has power to enact
Comstock reasoning 1
NP Clause makes it clear Consti grants of specific authority accompanied by broad power to enact laws convient/useful to authority’s “beneficial exercise”
Comstock reasoning 2
Cong power to create federal prisons –> power to civilly commit its prisoners since fed govt is custodian –> power to civilly commit
Comstock reasoning 3
Not too attenuated (unlike Lopez)
Kennedy comstock concurrence
analysis depends not on the number of links in the congressional power chain but the strength of the chain
Thomas Comstock dissent
NP empowers Congress to enact only those laws that carry into Execution one or more enumerated powers and no enumerated power covering civil committment regime
Comstock note based on Kennedy
doesn’t matter if Congress isn’t explicitly given enumerated power, just needs to pass rational basis analysis that law is somehow connected to an enumerated power
US v Morrison holding
CC did not empower Congress to enact Violence against women act which made certain acts of domestic violence federal crimes and torts
Perez v US holding
Anti-Loan sharking statute upheld, extortion is wholly intrastate but affects interstate commerce because fuels organized crime
Katzenbach reason 2
restaurant served meat that had once traveled in interstate commerce
Katzenbach test
all Congress needs is rational basis for thinking regulation of interstate commerce is convenient and useful to the promotion of interstate commerce
Katzenbach reason 1
racial discrim at restaurants direct and highly restrictive effect upon interstate travel of Black Americans
