Chapter 5 Flashcards
The aggregation principle, established in the Supreme Court’s decision in Wickard v. Filburn (1942), is a key principle in many modern Commerce Clause cases. Which of the following best describes this principle?
The aggregation principle gives Congress the power to regulate activities if those activities, when aggregated together, have a substantial impact on interstate commerce.
Which of the following statements best summarizes the Supreme Court’s ruling in Katzenbach v. McClung (1964)?
The Civil Rights Act of 1964, as applied to a restaurant, was a valid exercise of the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause.
The Supreme Court has interpreted the commerce power into three categories that Congress cannot go beyond. Which of the following does NOT belong to these categories?
Regulation of the President’s actions that affect commerce.
In NFIB v. Sebelius (2011), the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act. What was the Court’s reasoning for finding that the individual mandate exceeded Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause?
The Court held that regulating individuals based on what they fail to do would fundamentally change the relationship between the citizens and the federal government in a way that was not intended by the Framers of the Constitution.
According to the excerpt from the Supreme Court’s opinion in Katzenbach v. McClung (1964), what was the restaurant’s relationship to interstate commerce?
The restaurant annually received a substantial amount of food which has moved in interstate commerce.
In United States v. Morrison (2000), the Supreme Court invalidated a portion of the Violence Against Women Act. What was the Court’s rationale for this decision?
The Court held that gender-motivated violence did not have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, and therefore Congress could not regulate it under the Commerce Clause.
The relationship between national government power and state government power in the U.S. has been a continuing issue of constitutional law. One way the federal government’s power has been able to increase is because of the interpretation of the Commerce Clause. Which of the following best describes the Commerce Clause?
The Commerce Clause provides Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
In Gonzales v. Raich (2005), the Supreme Court considered the power of Congress to regulate the local growth, possession, and use of marijuana permitted under state law. What was the Court’s rationale for upholding Congress’s authority in this case?
The Court determined that the cultivation of marijuana for personal use created an economic class of activities with a substantial effect on interstate commerce, and therefore Congress had the authority to regulate it.
The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Lopez (1995) made clear that there are some activities that do not satisfy the “substantially affects” test with regard to the Commerce Clause. Which of the following statements best describes the Court’s reasoning in this case?
Despite the presence of a gun in a school zone having a possible indirect effect on interstate commerce, the Court found that this effect was too removed and not substantial enough to justify regulation under the Commerce Clause.
What was the Supreme Court’s position in United States v. Lopez (1995) with regard to the Commerce Clause?
The Gun-Free School Zones Act exceeded Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause because it did not regulate a commercial activity or have a substantial connection to interstate commerce.
