Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … Clause 3 of the United States Constitution -- was apparently originally intended to give the federal government and the U.S. Congress the authorization to tackle "certain economic issues" (Patterson, 2012). The economic issues that the Commerce Clause was intended to relate to was the power to: first, regulate commerce with foreign nations, and two, with Native American tribes. This paper delves into the Commerce Clause and finds that there has been some abuse of the clause by the federal courts.
The Commerce Clause
The Commerce Clause authorizes Congress the power "…to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes…" (Cornell Law).
According to the Cornell University Law School, the Commerce Clause has historically been seen as a "restriction on states' powers to regulate" and as a kind of "grant of congressional authority." In fact Congress has used the Commerce Clause as a justification for wielding legislative authority over states "…and their citizens" (Cornell Law). The reality of that power and authority is that states are not allowed (in many cases) to pass their legislation...
For example in 1905, the Court used the clause to "…halt price fixing in the Chicago meat industry"; in this instance the Court held that Congress did have the right to regulate the meat market under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act (Cornell Law, p. 1).
In getting the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964, a major piece of legislation that prohibited discrimination and basically banned segregation against African-Americans, President Johnson used the Commerce Clause "…in order to allow the federal government to charge non-state actors with Equal Protection violations, which it had been unable to do to that point because of the Fourteenth Amendment's limited application to state actors" (Cornell Law, p. 2).
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has defined the Commerce Clause more narrowly than others, according to Raney Barnett of the University of Chicago Law Review. Barnett references Thomas' view that when Congress uses the clause to regulate manufacturing or agriculture that "exceeds the powers of Congress under the clause" (Barnett, 2001, p. 2). However, Barnett believes Thomas' view is "highly debatable" because…
Works Cited
Barnett, Randy E. (2001). The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause. University of Chicago Law Review. Retrieved April 29, 2012, from http://www.bu.edu/rbarnett/Original.htm.
Cornell University Law School. (2007). Commerce Clause. Retrieved April 29, 2012, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause.
Patterson, Sandra J. (2012). U.S. Constitution: Interpretation and Use of the Commerce Clause.
Voices. Retrieved April 29, 2012, from http://voices.yahoo.com.
Texas on the Potomac / Chron.com. Retrieved April 29, 2012 from http://blog.chron.com.
Filburn harvested nearly 12 acres of wheat above his allotment. He claimed that he wanted the wheat for use on his farm, including feed for his poultry and livestock. Fiburn was penalized. He argued that the excess wheat was unrelated to commerce since he grew it for his own use. The question in the matter was: Is the amendment subjecting Filburn to acreage restrictions in violation of the Constitution
United States Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, the Declaration of Independence, and the Great Compromise The Articles of Confederation was the first document attempting to govern how the newly independent states were to act together in their union. However, the Articles of Confederation had significant flaws that rendered them an unrealistic tool for the government of the new states. While not all inclusive, the following are some of the weaknesses
1. What specific regulations/rules does the U.S. Constitution make about enslavement in America (article I: sect. 2 #1; article I, sect. 9, #1; article IV, sect. 2, #3)? Article I, Section 2 includes the “three-fifths” clause, which helped slave states gain more Congressional representatives by allowing slaves to count as “three fifths” of a person. Article I, Section 9, Number 1 places a new tax on the importation of new slaves,
Bill of Rights The United States Constitution was originally adopted at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, after the perceived failure of the colonies' first attempt at a foundational document for federal government, the Articles of Confederation. This is important to recall because in many ways the Constitution was written with an awareness of how such documents may fail in practice, and so its drafters included in Article 5 a set of
In addition it was agreed that issues of federal budget, revenue and taxation would originate with the House of Representatives. The Great Compromise issued in a spirit of success to the convention and essentially ended the division between the small and large states. However, it did nothing to alleviate the pending debate between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. Decisions on how much power to give to the people and to
Constitution of the United States was ratified after lengthy debate, mainly focused around issues related to the powers that would be bequeathed to the federal government. Although a gross oversimplification, the debate can be loosely qualified as being one between federalists on the one hand, and antifederalists on the other. Federalists, among them founding father luminaries from George Washington and Benjamin Franklin to James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John