The Important Commerce Clause

11. Which clause states that the Constitution, and federal statutes and treaties, shall be the supreme law of the land.

This article, "The Necessary and Proper Clause" also known as "The Elastic Clause," gives Congress the power to broaden its powers and keep Federal balance. Supreme Court Justice Marshall presents an argument that supports Congress' regulation over all commerce. He clearly says, "It is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed. This power, like all others vested in Congress, is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed in the Constitution." Where the Constitution states, "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several States, and with the Indian tribes," the word "among" means intermixed with. Commerce may concern more than one state, therefore Congress needs to act "within the territorial jurisdiction of the several states" The Supreme Court held that the power of Congress includes navigation within its limits in every State. Any state activity that attempts to regulate interstate commerce is completely unconstitutional because in dealing with interstate commerce, it can be inferred from the Constitution that the Federal government must regulate interstate commerce. The Constitution did not provide states with the power to regulate commerce between states so it is imperative that the federal government intercedes. Although the only

However how didn’t they see that the trade was under the constitution is beyond me like the fact that the Attorney General and the other cabinet members ignore the fundamental law(that every individual has rights) and are willing to let go of the an entire race without recognizing what will come of them, without even asking what they plan to do with them. Obviously shows that they have no deficiency of morals and that the extent to which political relations in the U. S. revolves around anti-black thought. The political positions of the characters enable us to find out to what extent in which racial political relations exists in this state and the text analyzes “the trade” and comprehends it with Bell’s construct of “the permanency of racism” in the United States. He was able to examine “the permanence of racism” because of the similarities between the past and present history in the United States.

The necessary and proper clause in the Constitution is a point of contention in the United States. Congress is given many implied powers in Article I Section 8 Clause 18, but this clause has been misinterpreted and the powers over-used.

The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, and Clause 3. The Clause states that the United States Congress shall power, “To regulate Commerce with Foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” The Commerce Clause represents one of the most fundamental powers delegated to Congress. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Lopez and reversed his conviction, holding that, “Section 922, in the full reach of its terms, is invalid as beyond the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause” (Source 1.)

The Necessary and Proper Clause was an important addition to our federal government’s expansion. In fact, the Necessary and Proper clause was vital to our current government setting. With the expansion of the federal government we see that you can take ideas from different people, and compromise to come to a meeting point on important issues, like the expansion of ideas that needed to be readdressed, and changed.

The Necessary and Proper Clause and its role in modern federal law, along with the questions that come from applying the clause.

Can you briefly explain what the dormant commerce clause is? The negative commerce clause, also known as the dormant commerce clause is a doctrine established by the U.S. Supreme Court, limiting individual states of the United States from passing legislation that inappropriately discriminates against interstate commerce. The dormant commerce clause limits the power of individual states to legislate on such matters and is not an express clause in the U.S. Constitution (AMAR, K. 2007). Why would dormant commerce clause apply to business?

The federal government began to gain power, and in Article I section 8 says, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts and provide the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imports and excises shall be uniform through the United States; to borrow money on the credit of the United Staes; to regulate commerce with foreign nation, and among the several states, and with the Indians Tribes… to establish post offices and post roads .” The following quote describes how the national government has different kinds of power compared to federal government. Article IV section 1 says, “full faith and credit shall be given in each states to the public acts, records, and judicial proceeding of every other state. And the Congress may general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved… ” In simpler words, the state government has to follow laws just like a ordinary

3b. Which amendment states that the powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states?

In Chapter 6, Wilkins discusses how the disclaimer clauses. These clauses keep states from exercising authority on Indian land (180). They are an “important but often overlooked tool in the arsenal available to tribes to assert their own sovereignty against state threats” (177). A specific example of a disclaimer clause is Wisconsin’s territorial disclaimer of 1836 which prohibited territories or states from having any authority on Indian land (180). In Native American Church v. Navajo Tribal Council (1959) it was declared that Indian tribes actually have a higher status than states (179). This was a major victory for Indians in their fight for sovereignty. United States v. Rickert (1903) was also a win for sovereignty in that the Court prohibited South Dakota from taxing Indian land (185).After the verdict in Seminole Tribe v. Florida (1996), the balance of power between state and federal government leaned towards the states. Before this, negotiations with tribes had been conducted at the federal level and not with states (187). This was against the idea of sovereignty because now the states had more power over the tribes and could abuse that power for personal gain.

The Commerce Clause in Article 1, Section 8 states that Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce itself as well as the power to regulate local commerce if that local commerce has a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce. When Congress regulates an intrastate activity, there is a test that is used by the Supreme Court that determines whether Congress actually has the right to regulate this intrastate activity with some sort of economic effect. The Commerce Clause test is one that also goes on to explain that it is not just about one instance where if there is a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce, but as a whole having a substantial economic effect. Also, if the activity does deal with interstate commerce that has an economic effect, then Congress has the ability to regulate wages and any other instance of activity which includes all workers even if the workers do not produce the commerce. Section 1001 of the PSA states Congress’ intention to “establish a nationwide program to protect the public from the adverse effects of tainted and contaminated pharmaceutical products.” Section 5001 of the PSA establishes licensing and pharmaceutical production education requirements for “individuals employed by any pharmaceutical producer” and sets maximum hours such individuals can work. One could then argue that the Supreme Court is allowed to say that Section 5001 of the PSA is within Congress’ power to set maximum hours and make people

One of the many powers given to Congress by the Constitution is the Commerce Clause. This clause allows Congress to regulate commerce between foreign nations, states, and Indian tribes. The authority laid out authorizes Congress to pass laws that ultimately regulate activities of states and citizens and free the restraints of states who feel otherwise. Throughout the history of the United States, the Commerce Clause has caused controversy over the extent that Congress can justify the use of this clause to pass laws. The Supreme Court has been relied on to determine the constitutionality of the laws and settle the controversies. One of these controversies lies within the Supreme Court case of United States v. Lopez.

Congress agreed with the finding presented by the Board of Treasury and prepared to address the states concerning this matter. William Samuel Johnson of Connecticut was put in charge of drafting the address to states. However, friends of Johnson warned him that the address would do little to encourage the people to contribute to the nation crisis, so the address was never delivered ("The Library of Congress," n.d.). Finally, the ability of Congress to control commerce between America and foreign nations was addressed ("The Library of Congress", n.d.). Because the Articles of Confederation gave Congress little control over the trades between foreign nations and various states, it was important for Congress to gain some order over the matter. According to "The Library of Congress" (n.d.), "In 1784, Congress requested that the states grant it limited power over commerce for fifteen years, but many of the states did not comply” (Congress is Unable to Control Commerce Between American and Foreign Nations). In 1785, James Monroe, a delegate, once more addressed the need for more control over commerce, which led the creation of a committee lead by Monroe. The new committee recommended amending the Articles of Confederation, on February 16, 1785, so that Congress could get the power needed for commerce ("The Library of Congress," n.d.). However, as before, few

. . regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” The Constitution further enumerates these powers denied to the states in Article I section x. The state of Georgia challenged the federal government’s power over states rights, a precursor to the Civil War, when it challenged the trust relationship and the autonomy of the Cherokee. Supreme Court Justice John Marshall in three decisions (Marshall Trilogy) upheld the United States’ federal power, defined the responsibility of the doctrine of federal trust, and clarified the sovereignty of Indian nations: Johnson v McIntosh 1823, Cherokee v Georgia 1831, Worcester v Georgia 1832.