Federal Powers Under the Commerce Clause Flashcards
3 things Congress can regulate under the commerce clause
Channels of interstate commerce (roads, highways, rivers, railroads); instrumentalities of interstate commerce (people or things that operate or travel in channels of interstate commerce); activities that affect commerce (must substantially effect)
Delegation Doctrine
- Delegation Doctrine allows congress to give administrative agency powers, but not delegate all of its law-making powers to it
- Congress cannot completely delegate its lawmaking ability to someone else like a private sector or independent agency. It is for Congress to enact laws
The Shreveport Case
Texas railway carriers charged much higher rates for trains coming out of Shreveport, LA, than they did from Texas cities. These higher rates adversely affected the Shreveport travel.
Holding/Reasoning: can regulate intrastate railroad rates b/c they substantially affect interstate commerce
Lottery Case
Federal Lottery Act is constitutional b/c congress’s power to regulate includes prohibiting power. The trafficking of lottery tickets across state lines constitutes interstate commerce that may be prohibited entirely by Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
(10th amendment argument fails b/c commerce clause is a power delegated to congress)
National Labor Relations Board v. Jones
- Court upheld federal statute regulating labor law that allowed unions, collective bargaining and forbid unfair practices
- Overrules E.C. Knight and extends the power of regulation over manufacturing and production.
- switches to the effect on commerce, not the source of the injury
United States v. Darby
- Congress has the power to regulate hours and wages of workers who are engaged in the production of goods destined for interstate commerce and can prohibit the shipment in interstate commerce of goods manufactured in violation of goods manufactured in violations of these regulations.
Wickard v. Filburn
Wheat farmer fined for farming more than allotted amount from the Agricultural Adjustment Act.
-Regulation is upheld by the court b/c they look at the aggregate (if every wheat farmer started planting more than allowed, it would have a substantial effect on interstate commerce of wheat)
Congress can lay and collect taxes
as long as its for the general welfare
Congress’s power to tax and spend
is not limited to those enumerated in the Constitution, as long as its in furtherance of the general welfare
Concurrent power
both federal and state governments tax citizens; shared power
Modern view on 10th Amendment
Courts have abandoned the idea the 10th amendment is a limit on the power to tax; courts defer to Congress in the exercise to regulate commerce, taxing and spending
United States v. Butler
Agricultural Adjustment Act taxed processing crops
SC puts a broad interpretation on the commerce clause + necessary and proper (good law)
-makes the act unconstitutional b/c the 10th amendment (OLD LAW)
Chas C. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis
-A federal law that taxes employers to fund national welfare assistance, but grants a credit toward that same tax to employers who help fund state welfare assistance programs, does not impermissibly coerce the states. Congress has the power to uniformly tax employers of state and offer tax credits.
- Congress cannot enact a law at coerces states contrary to the autonomy they have under the 10th amendment, but this is an inducement not coercion.
How can Congress induce a state to act?
Withholding federal funds (as long as whats being induced is not unconstitutional)
How can Congress bribe states?
encouraging states to enact laws by giving them a financial incentive (ex: in South Dakota v. Dole, “if you raise the drinking age to 21, we’ll give you money for highway repair”)
cannot be so coercive it becomes compulsion
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States
Hotel refused to rent rooms to African Americans.
Holding/Reasoning:
1. Congress may prohibit discrimination in public accommodations under its authority under the commerce clause
2. The power of congress to promote interstate commerce incudes the power to regulate the local incidents, including local activities, which might have a substantial and harmful effect upon commerce
3. “If it is interstate commerce that feels the pinch, it does not matter how local the operation that applies the squeeze,” indicating that the “moral” purpose behind the law does not invalidate it.
Rational Basis test
- Whether Congress had a rational basis
- Are the means reasonable and approportiate
Aggregation
- CC regulation of intrastate activity may be upheld only where the activity being regulated is economic in nature (commercial)
- You cannot aggregate the effect of non-economic activities.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Ollies BBQ in Atlanta refuses to serve African Americans, approx half the meat served was moved by interstate commerce
HOLDING: Commerce is impacted even if they don’t have interstate clients b/c less clients means less meat bought from out of state (Aggregate effect)
Perez v. US
loansharking affects commerce b/c it reduces spending power of Americans, therefore can be regulated
United States v. Lopez
Congress passed a law prohibiting the possesion firearms in a school zone, argued it can b/c of the commerce clause
HOLDING: Unconstititional
REASONING: too far removed from interstate commerce; not a commercial transaction so cannot aggregate (possession does not have to do with buying/selling guns)
US v. Morrison
Domestic violence is not a commercial transaction, so cannot be regulated by Congress under the commerce clause
Sebelius
Affordable Care Act required people to buy insurance or pay a fee.
HOLDING: The individual mandate contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 is unconstitutional under the commerce clause, but constitutional under the taxing power; The Medicaid expansion is an unconstitutional use of Congress’s spending powers.
REASONING: Individual mandate does not a commercial activity; cannot compel people to become active in commerce; States not given a choice they’re compelled to accept or risk losing existing Medicare funding
Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority
-Upheld law regulating minimum labor standards and wages
-Overrules Usery
-The test for determining state immunity from federal regulation under the Commerce Clause is not whether the state activity sought to be regulated is a traditional state function, but rather whether the regulation as applied to the state activity is destructive of state sovereignty or violative of any constitutional provision.
