COMMERCE CLAUSE Flashcards
Quote Commerce Clause
Art. I. Sec 8, cl 3. The Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
3 categories of functions the CC allows Congress to regulate?
- Channels of interstate commerce
(roads, telegraphs wires, navigable waterways, etc) - instrumentalities of interstate commerce
(people or goods traveling in commerce) - activities, including intrastate activities, that substatially affect interstate commerce
Champion v Ames (the Lottery Ticket case)
Shipping lottery tickets from TX to CA is instrumentality of interstate commerce so Congress has power to regulate under CC
Hammer v Dagenhart (the Child Labor Case)
Congress exceeded its CC power by passing Act prohibiting the shipment in interstate commerce of any products of any factories that employed children.
This is instrumentalityonly b/c 3rd category didn’t exist yet.
Here, the good itself is not bad, the instrumentality is bad. (overruled by Darby)
Schecter Poultry v US (the Sick Chicken Case)
F - SCOTUS struck down a Code, adopted under the National Industrial Recovery Act, to regulate trade practices, wages, hours, and collective bargaining in the New York poultry wholesale slaughtering market
C - The Court ruled that the regulation fell outside the commerce power because the regulated conduct had no “direct” effect upon interstate commerce
NOW OVERRULED
NLRB v J&L Steel
J&L, manufacturer with subs in several states, was charged with unfair labor practice.
R - Congress [NOW] has the power to regulate intrastate activity that has potential to affect interstate commerce.
US v Darby (upholding federal minimum wage)
F - Darby indicted for violation of wage and hour provisions of Fair Labor Standards Act
R - This case overrules Hammer v Dagenhart.
R - Motive is irrelevant as long as there is a rational basis. Congress must have a rational basis between the means employed by Congress and a constitutionally permissible end.
*******Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce extends to the regulation of intrastate activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce
Wickard v Filburn (aggregation)
F - Upheld a penalty under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 on Filburn for raising 239 bushels of wheat in excess of his marketing allotment.
This case adds the aggregation concept. Applies to every farmer similarly situated.
Question of fact for the court to determine whether or not a certain intrastate activity has a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
Must ask if there is a rational basis for concluding that there is a connection between the means and the end
Heart of Atlanta Motel
In 1964 Congress passed Civil Rights Act forbidding racial discrimination in public accommodations. HOAM refused to rent rooms to blacks.
C - Racial discrimination in public lodging had a deleterious effect on interstate movement of persons and goods. All similarly situated hotels taken together exert a substantial effect on IC.
As applied challenge to the law.
Constitutional source was equal protection , so use necessary and proper Clause
Katzenbach v McClung (BBQ)
Restaurant that refused to serve to blacks discourages travel and obstructs IC and all similarly situated restaurants together would have substantial effect. “aggregate effect”.
Lopez (guns in school)
The first limitation on Congress’ Commerce Clause power.
F - Federal law said no guns allowed in school zone. Lopez brought gun to school. Challenge to purely, intrastate, non-economic activity.
C - No economic value to interstate commerce. Also, criminal statutes are generally regulated by the states
No Jurisdictional Hook
Federal gun law was unconstitutional b/c tried to regulate purely intrastate non-economic power. NOTE: after Lopez, Congress amended statute to provide jurisdictional hook that if any part of gun traveled through interstate activity, then congress can regulate
US v Morrison (violence against women)
Student brought suit alleging sexual assault in violation of Violence Against Women Act.
Congress cannot use commerce clause to regulate local non-economic activity even if the national aggregate of the activity substantially affects interstate commerce
Gonzales v Raich (weed case)
Reich growing pot in backyard and giving to cancer patient neighbor. ****** Congress can regulate purely intrastate activity that is not itself commercial, in that it is not produced for sale, if it concludes that failure to regulate that class of activity would undercut the regulation of the interstate market in that commodity. *****
NFIB v Sebelius (Affordable Care Act)
Congress enacted ACA & imposed mandate requiring non-exempted Americans to maintain minimum essential health insurance coverage.
CC does not empower Congress to enact the individual mandate b/cc Congress has the power to regulate commerce, not to compel or create it. Power to regulate assumes that one is already engaging in commerce. (Must be currently engaged in the activity and it must be an economic activity in order for Congress to regulate. )
