...The Commerce Clause: Protector of Trade or Tool for Expanding Government Power? Ever since its inclusion in the Constitution, the Commerce Clause, along with the Necessary and Proper clause, has been a source of debate and contention. Indeed, there were over 1400 cases filed with the Supreme Court challenging its application before the 20th century alone. With the passage of the controversial Affordable Care Act, the Commerce Clause was brought once more to the forefront of national attention. The Obama administration, and other prominent voices on the Left, claim that the clause itself gave them broad powers of control and regulation. Those on the Right claim that the clause was put into place specifically to limit the influence of the Federal government on the power of trade between the states. The question is clear: does the Commerce Clause truly grant unlimited power to expand the Federal government through regulation, or has it been abused by those in the Federal government off and on since its inception? I will attempt to answer this question by examining first the Clause itself, the Federalist Paper written by James Madison (the father of the Commerce Clause) and then the Supreme Court cases which have called it into question. Let us begin by examining the wording of the Commerce Clause (along with the Necessary and Proper clause) itself: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the...
Words: 1984 - Pages: 8
...The Commerce Clause and its Effects on Business Commerce Clause is defined in the glossary of our text as provision in the U.S. Constitution controlling the regulation of intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce and delineating authority for such regulation. (Business, p.G-4) Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution empowers Congress “to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among several States, and with Indian Tribes.” The term commerce as used in the Constitution signifies business or commercial trades in any and all of its usages between citizens of different states, including purely social communications between citizens of different states by telegraph, telephone, or radio, and the mere passage of persons from one state to another for either...
Words: 503 - Pages: 3
...Rachael Gray Writing Assignment 1 Does the United States federal government have a legitimate national security interest, drawing on its powers found in the Commerce Clause in Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution, to regulate state-issued driver licenses? Why or why not? The United States Federal Government does have a legitimate national security interest by regulating state-issued driver licenses. Commerce is defined in the dictionary as “the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place”. Given that definition it is rather obvious that Drivers Licenses are deemed commerce. The commerce clause in the U.S. Constitution hence its name gives the federal government the...
Words: 652 - Pages: 3
...would have to purchase these hitches to go through this one state or go around the state of Confusion. What Court will have Jurisdiction of Tanya’s Suit? Tanya Trucker resides in the state of Denial and she is placing suit against the state of Confusion. Therefore, the federal court will have jurisdiction over this case. Cheeseman (2010) states, “A case may be brought in federal court if there is diversity of citizenship” (p 12). Tanya Trucker could file suit in the federal court for violating the commerce clause of the constitution. “The commerce clause grants the federal government the authority to regulate interstate commerce” (Cheeseman, 2010, p. 73). The interstate commerce has the ability to pass laws that regulate the behaviors of business. Is the Confusion Statue constitutional? The Confusion statue is not constitutional. The interstate commerce clause shows this in Article I, Section 9. Cheeseman, 2010 states, “No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another; nor shall vessels bound to, or from, on state, be obligated to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another” (p 87). This clearly shows that the state of Confusion cannot charge dues, the special hitch, to any other state such as the state of Denial. What provisions of the U.S. Constitution will be applied by a court to determine the statute’s validity? The federal government has the responsibility to enact safety requirements for vehicles, this...
Words: 1490 - Pages: 6
...In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had exceeded its constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause when it passed a law prohibiting gun possession in local school zones. The case arose out of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which made it a federal offense "for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone." Alfonso Lopez Jr., a high school senior, was convicted in a federal district court for knowingly possessing a concealed handgun and bullets at his San Antonio high school. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision, ruling that the law was beyond the reach of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. The government appealed to the Supreme Court, which reviewed the case in 1994. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and released in 1995, ruled that the Gun-Free School Zones Act was unconstitutional and overturned Lopez's conviction. The Court ruled that the act exceeded the limited powers of Congress under the Constitution, rejecting the government's argument that the act was constitutional because the buying and selling of guns and associated illicit activities affect "interstate commerce," which Congress may regulate under the Commerce Clause. The government claimed that gun violence in schools leads to both more dangerous and thus less commercially healthy neighborhoods and less...
Words: 604 - Pages: 3
...(See page 23.) * According to our textbook, Due Process is related to both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments providing that no person shall be deprived “of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Therefore, in this situation, due process requires the governmental decision to take those (life, liberty, or property) fairly. * 1–7 The Dormant Commerce Clause. In 2001, Puerto Rico enacted a law that requires specific labels on cement sold in Puerto Rico and imposes fines for any violations of these requirements. The law prohibits the sale or distribution of cement manufactured outside Puerto Rico that does not carry a required label warning that the cement may not be used in government-financed construction projects. Antilles Cement Corp., a Puerto Rican firm that imports foreign cement, filed a complaint in federal court, claiming that this law violated the dormant commerce clause. (The dormant commerce clause doctrine applies not only to commerce among the states and U.S. territories, but also to international commerce.) Did the 2001 Puerto Rican law violate the dormant commerce clause? Why or why not? [Antilles Cement Corp. v. Fortuno, 670 F.3d 310 (1st Cir. 2012)] (See page 14.) * In my opinion, 2001 Puerto Rican law violated the...
Words: 321 - Pages: 2
...their different state laws in rear-fender mudguards, in Georgia, its state government enact the law that all the trucks must install contoured rear-fender mudguard in state lines, in contract, Florida state government regulate its trucks and trailers must use straight mudguards. Concerning to whether Georgia statue violates the commerce clause of the U.S, Georgia state government does not violate the commerce clause because of police power, states possess the power to regulate private activities in order to protect or promote public order, health, safety, morals, and general welfare. On the other hand, based on the meaning of the dormant commerce clause, when state regulations impinge on interstate commerce, courts must balance the state’s interest in the merits and purposes of the regulation against the burden that the regulation places on interstate commerce, congress court could intervene laws enacted by state governments. Drivers have to stop by roads to change their mudguards, which is not only time consuming but also expenses expensing. In this case, the regulation is an “undue burden” on interstate commerce. In terms of the Supremacy Clause, there are three aspects to prevent it from any other challenges. 1. Preemption: federal laws is said to preempt a conflicting state or local laws. 2. federal law is pervasive, comprehensive, or detailed that it leaves state and local law no room to supplement it 3. Federal laws create a federal regulatory agency that...
Words: 258 - Pages: 2
...the statutes grounds, also whether the Confusion statute is constitutional, and to see if Tanya is destined to prevail on her lawsuit. Court Jurisdiction Tanya lives in the state of Denial and is placing an appeal against the state of Confusion. The federal government has the right to attest safety obligations for vehicles, which also include trucks. For the simple fact that Tanya proceed with the federally direct rules and obligations, Tanya’s business can now have permission to travel on the interstate in the state of Confusion. Tanya Trucker could file a claim in a federal court based on an unconstitutional restraint on trade or violation of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The Commerce Clause, Article I Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States, grants Congress the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes” (Lawnix, n.d.). According to The Legal Information Institute (n.d.), The Constitution enumerates certain powers for the federal government; the Tenth Amendment provides that any powers that are not enumerated in the Constitution are reserved for the...
Words: 699 - Pages: 3
...State of Confusion Geoffrey Goebel BUS/415 March 21, 2012 Tracy Bomar-Howze, JD, Esq. State of Confusion The state of Confusion endorsed a statute that requires trucks and tractor trailers that use its freeways to attach a B-type truck hitch. The hitch in question is produced by one particular company in Confusion. This statute mandates that any trucker who proceeds to drive through Confusion is ordered to stop and have this hitch mounted on his or her truck, or drive around the state. The federal government has not anticipated the need to standardize the truck hitches used on state traveled highways and therefore no action has been taken. Tanya Trucker, who is the owner of a trucking business in the state of Denial, is unhappy about the supplementary expense this statute imposes on her business. Tanya plans to file suit against Confusion to upend the law. Jurisdiction, determining if the Confusion statute is constitutional, provisions of the U.S. Constitution applied to determine validity, the outcome, and the stages of the civil suit are considered in this case. Court Jurisdiction and Confusion Statute * The first order of operations is to determine what court will have jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit and why. Jurisdiction refers to which state or court system has the power to oversee litigations with regard to a court case (Butera, 2012). When determining...
Words: 1167 - Pages: 5
...that interstate trucking is a huge and profitable business, and could possibly inflict an economic hardship not just on her company in Denial, but on many others trucking companies that want to go though the State of Confusion, but can’t because the manufacture of the (B-Type) truck hitch is only located in the state of Confusion. Therefore, Tanya Trucker has decided to file a lawsuit against the State of Confusion. She feels that the statue is unconstitutional, and may cause problems not just for her living in Denial, but for other out of state truck drivers as well. With Tanya Trucker living in the State of Denial, she could file her law-suit in Federal Court. According to the text, The Legal Environment of Business and Online Commerce, Sixth Edition, “If there is diversity in citizenship, than a case may be brought in federal court if a lawsuit involves citizens of different states, or a citizen of a state and a citizen or subject of a foreign...
Words: 1012 - Pages: 5
...Pence State of Confusion Tanya Tucker intends to file a suit against the State of Confusion to overturn their statute regarding the truck hitch. Tanya will be filing the suit in the Federal Courts as a un- constitutional restraint on trade or violation of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution and the Necessary and Proper Clause. The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution. The Clause states that the United States Congress has the power “To regulate Commerce with Foreign Nations and among several states and Indian Tribes “The Commerce Clause Power is often amplified by the Necessary and Proper Clause which states the Commerce Clause power and all of the other enumerated powers may be implemented by the power. The United States Constitution is clearer about the role of Congress when dealing with the Interstate Commerce and would depend on the circumstances presented by a specific case. The State of Confusion statute would be constitutional if Confusion could make a rational relationship for legislation. The State of Confusion would need to point out specific safety reasoning for enacting the statute, not just for the purpose of restraining trade and commerce among the states or giving a company an unfair advantage. It is the strict province of the federal government to enact safety requirements for vehicles and the State of Confusion is not allowed to regulate a specific type of hitch. Confusion is the sole manufacturer of...
Words: 729 - Pages: 3
...jurisdiction over this case because Tanya Trucker leaves in the State of Denial, and her suit will be against the State of Confusion. Cheeseman (2010) stated “A case may be brought in federal court if there is diversity of citizenship” (p. 41). Because this case will have a federal question because Tanya Trucker could file her lawsuit against the State of Confusion for violating the commerce clause under the U.S. Constitution. Cheeseman (2010) stated “The Commerce Clause gives the federal government the authority to regulate the interstate commerce.” The U.S. Supreme Court has handled numerous case, but one particular case is the Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona, 325 U.S. 761, 65 S. Ct. 1515, 89 L. Ed. 1915 (1945), this case was about an Arizona statute that prohibited railroads with more than 70 freight cars to travel within the state (“The Free Dictionary by Farlex,” 2012). This law was found to be a violation of the Commerce Clause, despite of the fact that it treated intrastate and interstate commerce equally to the point that when put into operation the law hindered interstate commerce as there was difficulties faced by the train if it followed the state law. Similarly a statute was endorsed by the State of Confusion, recommending the use...
Words: 1260 - Pages: 6
...address the U.S. Constitution, treaties, and federal statutes and regulations (Cheeseman, 2010). Tanya’s suit questions the state of Confusion’s right to enforce a statute of driving privileges on national highways. The second reason is based on diversity of citizenship. Diversity of citizenship jurisdiction is allowed when the parties involved live in different states or countries and this prevents state court bias against nonresidents (Cheeseman, 2010). Tanya’s company was formed in the state of Denial giving her suit the right to be heard in federal court because of diversity of citizenship. The state of Confusion statute is unconstitutional. Confusion is in violation of the Commerce Clause. This is a clause in the U.S. Constitution that gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign...
Words: 1396 - Pages: 6
...SIERRA CLUB v. MORTON Supreme Court of the United States, 1972. 405 U.S. 727, 92 S. Ct. 1361, 31 L.Ed.2d 636. Facts of the Case • Plaintiff sues Town of Clarkstown, N.Y. for flow control ordinance requiring all nonhazardous material to be deposited in local transfer station; thus infringing on the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. • The Commerce Clause is a grant of power to Congress that invalidates local laws that impose commercial barriers or discriminates against an article of commerce by reason of its origin or destination out of State. • The Defendant, Town of Clarkstown, N.Y., closed down its landfill and built a transfer station in order to comply with environmental regulations. A local private contractor was hired to build said transfer station, operate it for 5 years, after which the town would buy it for $1. The size of the facility was based on the amount of trash taken to the transfer station each year. The hauler of each waste was required to pay an $81 “tipping fee” for each ton of waste taken to the transfer station; this was done in order to repay the cost of the transfer station to the contractor. In order to ensure that the guaranteed yearly amount of trash was taken to the transfer station the town adopted the flow control ordinance, Local Law 1990, No. 9, which required all nonhazardous solid waste within the town to be deposited at the new transfer station. Local Law 9 also prohibited individual haulers from taking their trash...
Words: 416 - Pages: 2
...agents charged Lopez with violating the Act. The District Court denied Lopez’s motion to dismiss the indictment, concluding that the GFSZA was a constitutional exercise of Congress’ power pursuant to the Commerce Clause of Article I. The Fifth Circuit reversed, holding that the Act exceeded Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause and was therefore unconstitutional. The Supreme Court granted cert. Issues Does the GFSZA exceed Congress’ authority under the Commerce Clause? What categories of activity may Congress regulate under its commerce power? Holding and Rule (Rehnquist) Yes. The GFSZA exceeded Congress’ authority under the Commerce Clause. The three broad categories of activity that Congress may regulate under its commerce power are: a) the use of the channels of interstate commerce; b) Congress is empowered to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in interstate commerce, even though the threat may come only from intrastate activities; and c) Congress’ commerce authority includes the power to regulate those activities having a substantial relation to interstate commerce, i.e., those activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. The Supreme Court held that the GFSZA exceeded Congress’ Commerce Clause authority. The possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have a...
Words: 750 - Pages: 3
