Legislative Power, Part II: Commerce Clause
2 likes648 views
This document provides an overview of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution and key Supreme Court cases that have interpreted the scope of congressional power under the clause over time. It discusses how early cases like Gibbons v. Ogden established a broad interpretation of commerce, but then cases between the late 1800s-1930s increasingly limited the definition. The document outlines how precedents started changing again in the 1930s-40s to expand congressional power in response to New Deal legislation, culminating in the expansive interpretation established in Wickard v. Filburn. It then discusses how the 1995 Lopez case reined in this interpretation to some degree by requiring a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
![The Commerce Clause
●
The U.S. Constitution empowers Congress
“[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign
Nations, and among the several States, and
with the Indian Tribes.”
– U.S. Const. Art. I, Sec. 8
●
Questions:
– What is commerce?
– What does “among the several states” mean?](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/03commerceclause-190731065733/85/Legislative-Power-Part-II-Commerce-Clause-22-320.jpg)
![Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S.
●
1964 Civil Rights Act
bans discrimination in
public accommodations
by private parties.
●
Local Atlanta hotel
refuses to give a room to
black family.
●
Does Congress have the
power to regulate the
actions of a local hotel?
●
“[T]he power of Congress to
promote interstate commerce
also includes the power to
regulate the local incidents
thereof, including local
activities in both the States of
origin and destination, which
might have a substantial and
harmful effect upon that
commerce.”
●
Individual discrimination by
local business owners, when
take together, have effect on
commerce.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/03commerceclause-190731065733/85/Legislative-Power-Part-II-Commerce-Clause-34-320.jpg)
Legislative Power, Part II: Commerce Clause
- 1. U.S. Constitutional Law Legislative Power Part II:Legislative Power Part II: The Commerce ClauseThe Commerce Clause Text in RED are words you should learn Text in BLUE are links to additional resources
- 2. Goals of This Session ● Understand the meaning of the Commerce Clause. ● Learn about the basics of precedent. ● See how Supreme Court precedent can change.
- 3. Structure of this session I. Introduction to precedent II. Historical Interpretations of the Commerce Clause III.The Lopez Case IV.Applying the Lopez Standard
- 4. Commerce Clause in Context ● Topic –> express powers of Congress. – REMEMBER the concept of limitedlimited governmentgovernment! ● We already discussed the express spending and taxing power. ● Liberal interpretation of commerce (this week) and necessary and proper (next week!) clauses have expanded federal power.
- 5. U.S. Constitutional Law A Detour: Precedent In the U.S. Court System
- 6. The Meaning of PrecedentPrecedent Generally ● “precedent” = something that has happened before – Also means an event which defines a standard. ● “Unprecedented” is something that is uncommon or beyond standard. – “Spam levels run to unprecedented heights” ● recent headline from PC Magazine
- 7. 04/06/18 7 Legal PrecedentLegal Precedent ● Past cases with similar legal issues and facts. ● Compares current case with past cases. ● Legal principles/rules from past cases are then applied to current case. ● Sometimes called AuthorityAuthority
- 8. 04/06/18 8 Stare DecisisStare Decisis ● Latin for “to stand by things decided” ● Rule established by prior court that must be followed by current court. – Often referred to as “binding precedent” ● Two Kinds: – VerticalVertical: lower courts must follow rules from higher courts – HorizontalHorizontal: courts at same level must follow own past rules.
- 9. 04/06/18 9 Stare Decisis Illustrated Court of AppealsSimilar facts and law Horizontal Stare DecisisHorizontal Stare Decisis Vertical stareVertical stare DecisisDecisis Similarfacts andlaw NOTE – the operation of horizontal stare decisis in the U.S. federal system is far more complicated than this. We will discuss it further when we discuss the Judicial Branch.
- 10. 04/06/18 10 Stare Decisis the U.S. Constitutional Law ● All lower courts are bound by higher court decisions. (vertical) ● U.S. Supreme Court is not bound by its own decisions. (no horizontal) ● Supreme Court can review state court decision based on federal law. We will discuss U.S. Court system in greater detail in another lecture
- 11. 04/06/18 11 Cliqr Question ● A past case is precedent when it: (a) Was decided by the same court (b) Has similar facts and legal issues (c) Involves the same parties (d) Is designated as precedent by the legislature
- 12. 04/06/18 12 Elements of Case ● Court – one that creates binding precedent? ● Facts – help determine if case is precedent ● Issue – the legal question before the court ● Holding – the rule used/developed by the court to decide the case – This is what will be applied to the current case. ● Rationale – why the court used the rule – Can be used to distinguish!
- 13. 04/06/18 13 Precedent in German Courts? ● § 31 BVerfGG – (1) Die Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts binden die Verfassungsorgane des Bundes und der Länder sowie alle Gerichte und Behörden.
- 14. 04/06/18 14 Avoiding Precedent ● Ways to avoid precedent: – Overrule – Distinguish – Disapprove
- 15. 04/06/18 15 Disapproving Precedent ● Lower court refuses to apply binding precedent. – Decision likely to be appealed to higher court that made the binding precedent. – Goal is to convince higher court to overrule the precedent. ● Lower courts rarely do this!
- 16. 04/06/18 16 Overruling ● Some courts cannot overrule themselves = horizontal stare decisishorizontal stare decisis. – Federal Courts of Appeals cannot overrule themselves! ● But they can overrule decisions by District Court ● The Supreme Court can always overrule itself but rarely does. – Can also overrule decisions by Court of Appeals
- 17. 04/06/18 17 General Categories of Overruling ● Renovative - when there has been a change in society justifying a new rule. ● Corrective - when the first rule was a mistake ● Legislative - the make up of the court is new, thus new ideas and beliefs lead to new rules
- 18. 04/06/18 18 DistinguishingDistinguishing ● identifying aspects of a previous decision that would make it inappropriate to use its ratio in the present case. – Aspects = different facts or rationale (reasons for decision). ● Most common way of avoiding precedent!
- 19. 04/06/18 19 Cliqr Question ● Which of the following is NOT a method of avoiding precedent: a) Reversing b) Distinguishing c) Overruling d) Dissenting
- 20. 04/06/18 20 Why Discuss This Now? ● Commerce Clause jurisprudence provides good example of how precedent changes and develops. – Note precedent is source of common law (judge made law) in common law legal systems. – How we use precedent is the same in the constitutional law context.
- 21. 04/06/18 21 The Many Views of The Commerce Clause Power Achtung! – pay close attention. Some of these cases were later overruled by the court.
- 22. The Commerce Clause ● The U.S. Constitution empowers Congress “[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” – U.S. Const. Art. I, Sec. 8 ● Questions: – What is commerce? – What does “among the several states” mean?
- 23. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) ● Odgen given monopoly by New York for passenger transit between N.Y. and N.J. ● Gibbons given right by Congress for same route. ● Odgen claims State of New York has right to grant monopoly and this should not be interfered with by Congress. – Put differently, Congress does not have the power to interfere. Above, a 19th century rendition of the Port of New York
- 24. Understanding the Case ● The issues here involve: – Is the movement of people commerce? ● If not, then Congress cannot grant the license here. ● If so, then Congress can grant the license. – When Congress and States both have the power to act, is the federal power supreme? ● If the federal power is supreme, then Gibbons wins. ● If state regulations are granted equal weight, Ogden likely wins.
- 25. The Ruling of the Court ● Federal commerce power is supreme ● Within power of Congress – Commerce = navigation – Navigation = movement of people by boat – Thus, moving people = commerce!
- 26. The Next 50 Years ● Congress doesn’t use this power ● Most regulation is done by states ● Court deals mostly only with: – whether states can regulate when Congress choose not to OR – whether states discriminate against businesses from other states.
- 27. U.S. v. EC Knight (1885) (overruled by later decision) ● Facts: – Federal law bans monopolies. – E.C. Knight owned 98% of sugar production. ● Question: – can Congress prohibit monopolies in manufacturing of goods? ● Holding – NO. – Commerce = distribution of goods but not manufacturing. – Manufacturing only has indirect impact on distribution of goods. – Congress can only regulate direct impacts.
- 28. Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) (Overruled by later decision) ● Facts: – Federal law prohibits child labor. – Father of 15 year-old claims Congress lacked power because labor is part of manufacturing. ● HOLDING – Commerce only deals with distribution of good. – Labor is part of production, not distribution of goods. – States can regulate production but federal government cannot.
- 29. Cliqr Question ● These cases: a) Expand the power of Congress b) Limit the power of Congress c) Have no effect on the power of Congress
- 30. “The Switch In Time That Saved Nine” ● Cases between 1933 and 1935 struck down “New Deal” Laws. ● Pres. Roosevelt then threatened to “pack the Court.” ● Two Justices changed their views.
- 31. NLRB v. Jones (1937) ● Facts: Congress passes law regulating labor practices. ● Question: Can Congress regulate work condition at companies engaged in interstate commerce? – YES. ● Holding: Yes – Collective bargaining rules = fewer strikes = fewer disruptions to flow of goods among the states. – Whether labor unrest has a direct or indirect effect on the movement of goods is not relevant. ● Abandons rationale in E.C. Knight case.
- 32. U.S. v. Darby (1940) ● Federal Law regulates working conditions at companies engaged in interstate commerce. ● Commerce is NOT just about distribution of goods. – expressly overturns Hammer v. Dagenhart – Rationale and conclusion in that case was wrong! Children working on a weaving loom
- 33. Wickard v. Filburn (1942) ● Facts: – Local farmer grew more wheat personal consumption than allowed by law. ● Holding: – Even activity that looks local can be regulated when it affects interstate commerce. – Aggregate effect principle. ● Where is the effect? – wheat needed above limit should have been purchased in interstate market for wheat. – By growing more, he was taking away business from the market. – When thousands of others do this, effect is large.
- 34. Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S. ● 1964 Civil Rights Act bans discrimination in public accommodations by private parties. ● Local Atlanta hotel refuses to give a room to black family. ● Does Congress have the power to regulate the actions of a local hotel? ● “[T]he power of Congress to promote interstate commerce also includes the power to regulate the local incidents thereof, including local activities in both the States of origin and destination, which might have a substantial and harmful effect upon that commerce.” ● Individual discrimination by local business owners, when take together, have effect on commerce.
- 35. Cliqr Question ● These cases: a) Expand the power of Congress b) Limit the power of Congress c) Have no effect on the power of Congress
- 36. U.S. v. Lopez ● Congress passes law prohibiting guns on school grounds. ● Student is arrested for violating the law. ● See “Case Brief” on StudIP
- 37. Cliqr Question ● Lopez changed the way the commerce clause is interpreted by: a) Returning to the very limited interpretation the court used prior to 1937 b) Demanding that the activity has a substantial effect on interstate commerce c) Abandoning the idea “aggregate effect” to reach purely local activity d) It didn’t change the way the clause was interpreted
- 38. Cliqr Question ● Did Congress have the power to create the civil remedy in Violence Against Women Act ? – Yes – No ● Did Congress have the power to stop animal fighting via the Animal Welfare Act? – Yes – No
- 39. Testing the Limits ● Please read the article in StudIP from N-TV. – “ob die US-Verfassung dem Kongress und der Regierung das Recht gibt, Bürger mit einem Bußgeld zum Abschluss einer Kranken- versicherung zu zwingen.” – "Die Frage ist, ob der Kongress zum ersten Mal in unserer Geschichte die Macht hat, die Menschen in eine Handelsbeziehung zu zwingen."
- 40. Testing the Limits ● President Obama’s health care reform requires citizens to buy private health insurance or face a penalty (as we saw in the lecture last week this was later deemed a tax by the court). – Does Congress also have the power under the Commerce Clause to force people to buy private health insurance?