Constitutional Law Flashcards
Federal Power–The Commerce Clause
Despite the fact that the federal power to regulate power is very broad, the states also have a substantial amount of regulatory power over commerce.
Federal Regulation of Interstate Commerce
Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution grants Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among several states.” Many provisions of the Constitution were aimed at preventing various kinds of provincialism and thus making the US truly “united”. By giving Congress the primary authority to regulate interstate commerce, the commerce clause was intended to make the US a common market.
Narrow View of Commerce Clause
Until the late 1930s, the Supreme Court interpreted Congress’s authority under the commer clause fairly narrowly, holding that it could primarily regulate commerce that a.) actually crossed state lines or b.) involved instrumentalities of interstate commerce such as rivers and railroads.
Less Narrow View of Commerce Clause
Beginning in the 1930s, the Court added a third and extremely broad category, holding that Congress could regular commerce occurring entirely within the single border for a single state so long as the commercial activty had “any appreciable effect” on interstate or foreign commerce.
Wickward V Filburn
Supreme Court helpd that if an exception was made for famer Filburn, then exceptions would have to made for other farmers and the aggregate effect on interstate commerce could be appreciable.
How Congress uses the Commerce Clause
Congress often uses the Commerce clause as a constitutional foundation for enacting legislation even when its primary goal is not an economic one. “Commerce” includes almost anything remotely related to an economic activity, including manufacturing, advertising, contracting, sales and sales financing, transportation, capital-raising, and so on.
State Regulation of Commerce
States retain substantial authority to regulate commercial activities.
Federal Preemption
a general principle of constitutional law that applies to any state-federal conflict. The doctrine of preemption is relevant regardless of whether a particular federal power comes from the commerce clause or from some other provision of the Constitution
Express Preemption
When a preemption question arises, we begin with one basic proposition: The Supremacy Clause found in article VI, section 1 makes the Constitution the “supreme law of the land”. means among other things, that if the Constitution gives a power to the federal government, the federal government also has the authority to prohibit the states from exercise a similar power. When using this power to pass patent legislation, Congress can engage in express preemption by specifying in the legislation that the states have no power to adopt similar laws.
Implied Preemption
When Congress has chosen to regulate some activity but has said nothing about whether the states do or do not have power to pass related laws, a question of implied preemption may arise. When a claim of implied preemption is made, the party challenging the state law is asking the court to draw an inference about the intent of Congress. The challenger usually must prove two conditions. 1.) Federal regulation is relative comprehensive 2.) very strong need for a uniform regulatory policy in this area.
Direct Conflict
A much narrower form of preemption occurs when a specific state law is in direct conflict with a specific provision of a federal law. The state law is void to the extent of the conflict. Void if: 1.) There is a direct conflict if it is impossible to comply with both state and federal law 2.) even if it is literally possible to comply, there nevertheless is a direct conflict if the state law substantially interferes with the purpose of the federal law.
Unduly Burdening Interstate Commerce
If a state law challenged on this basis is shown to hinder the free flow of interstate commerce in some way, the court uses a balancing analysis to determine whther or not the law is constitutional. To determine whether there is an undue burdening of interstate commerce, the court balances the local interested being furthered by the state law against the degree of burden it places on interstate commerce.
