On Confidence

1. The Commerce Clause: Foundation of Federal Economic Power

The Congress shall have Power...To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.

Constitutional cornerstone. The Commerce Clause, found in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, grants Congress the power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. This seemingly simple provision has become one of the most important and contested parts of the Constitution, serving as the basis for a vast array of federal laws and regulations.

Broad implications. Over time, the interpretation of the Commerce Clause has expanded to allow federal regulation of:

• Production and manufacturing
• Labor relations
• Environmental protection
• Civil rights
• Criminal law

The clause's interpretation has been central to debates about the proper balance of power between the federal government and the states, reflecting changing views on federalism and the role of government in economic and social affairs.

2. Evolving Interpretations: From Gibbons to the New Deal Era

Commerce, undoubtedly, is traffic, but it is something more: it is intercourse.

Early expansion. In Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), Chief Justice John Marshall established a broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause. He defined commerce as not just buying and selling, but as "intercourse" encompassing navigation and other forms of movement between states.

Limitations emerge. However, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Supreme Court often limited federal power under the Commerce Clause:

• United States v. E.C. Knight Co. (1895): Manufacturing was not considered interstate commerce
• Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918): Production of goods was deemed local, not interstate

This restrictive view reflected the Court's adherence to laissez-faire economic principles and a narrow view of federal power, which would be challenged during the Great Depression and New Deal era.

3. The New Deal and Expansion of Federal Authority

The power of Congress over interstate commerce is not confined to the regulation of commerce among the states. It extends to those activities intrastate which so affect interstate commerce or the exercise of the power of Congress over it as to make regulation of them appropriate means to the attainment of a legitimate end, the exercise of the granted power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.

Paradigm shift. The Great Depression and New Deal led to a dramatic expansion of federal power under the Commerce Clause. Key decisions include:

• NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (1937): Upheld federal regulation of labor relations
• United States v. Darby (1941): Overturned Hammer v. Dagenhart, allowing regulation of production
• Wickard v. Filburn (1942): Extended federal power to purely local activities with aggregate effects on interstate commerce

These decisions established the "substantial effects" test, allowing Congress to regulate activities that, when viewed in aggregate, substantially affect interstate commerce. This broad interpretation provided the constitutional basis for much of the modern regulatory state.

4. Civil Rights and the Commerce Power

Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a constitutional exercise of Congress' power under the Commerce Clause.

Social progress through commerce power. The Commerce Clause became a powerful tool for advancing civil rights in the 1960s. In Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States (1964), the Supreme Court upheld the Civil Rights Act of 1964's ban on racial discrimination in public accommodations.

Rationale and impact. The Court reasoned that:

• Discrimination in hotels and restaurants discouraged interstate travel
• This reduction in travel had a substantial effect on interstate commerce
• Therefore, Congress could prohibit such discrimination under its commerce power

This decision demonstrated how the expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause could be used to address social issues beyond traditional economic regulation. It allowed the federal government to combat racial discrimination in areas where state and local laws were inadequate or discriminatory.

5. Modern Limits: Lopez and Morrison Decisions

We start with first principles. The Constitution creates a Federal Government of enumerated powers.

Reining in federal power. In the 1990s and 2000s, the Supreme Court began to place limits on the previously expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause:

• United States v. Lopez (1995): Struck down the Gun-Free School Zones Act
• United States v. Morrison (2000): Invalidated parts of the Violence Against Women Act

New framework. These decisions established that:

• The regulated activity must be "economic" in nature
• There must be a jurisdictional element linking the activity to interstate commerce
• Congressional findings on the activity's impact on interstate commerce are helpful but not determinative
• The link between the regulated activity and interstate commerce cannot be too attenuated

This new approach reflected the Court's concern about preserving the balance between federal and state power, and maintaining meaningful limits on congressional authority under the Commerce Clause.

6. Gonzales v. Raich: Reaffirming Broad Federal Power

Our case law firmly establishes Congress' power to regulate purely local activities that are part of an economic "class of activities" that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce.

Broad power upheld. In Gonzales v. Raich (2005), the Supreme Court reaffirmed Congress's broad power under the Commerce Clause, upholding federal prohibition of locally grown marijuana for medical use.

Key principles:

• Congress can regulate purely local activities if they are part of a larger economic regulatory scheme
• The Court will defer to Congress's judgment about the aggregate effects of local activities on interstate commerce
• Individual instances of regulated activity need not themselves have a substantial effect on interstate commerce

This decision demonstrated the continuing vitality of the expansive Commerce Clause interpretation established during the New Deal era, even in the face of the limits imposed by Lopez and Morrison.

7. Balancing Act: Federalism in the 21st Century

The Constitution requires a distinction between what is truly national and what is truly local.

Ongoing tension. The interpretation of the Commerce Clause continues to evolve, reflecting broader debates about federalism and the proper balance of power between the national government and the states.

Key considerations:

• Effectiveness of national vs. local regulation
• Protection of individual liberties
• Promotion of policy experimentation at the state level
• Need for uniform national standards in an interconnected economy

The Commerce Clause remains a crucial battleground in defining the scope of federal power. Future interpretations will likely continue to grapple with the challenge of maintaining a meaningful federalist system while addressing complex national and global issues that often transcend state boundaries.

Last updated: January 24, 2025