Doctrinal Con Law Summary - Steiker, Fall 2007

Doctrinal Con Law Summary - Steiker, Fall 2007 - Commerce...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Commerce Clause o Constitutionality Commercial goals v. Social goals Are social goals permissible? ο Limiting the Commerce Clause Internal Limits Subject matter limits Doctrine define "regulate" and "commerce among the  Several States" Subject matter limit protect the values of federalism "Commerce" Definition of commerce  Mfg? Extraction? Transport? Sale?  Merely the  action transaction? "Among the several States" Intrastate commerce that affects other states?  Completely  internal vs. true interstate commerce "regulate" Must a statute be directed at commercial goals to qualify  as a "regulation"? External Limits Might allow Congress to do anything reasonably regarded as  interstate or foreign commerce, but other provisions of the Constitution  (1st Amendment, State Sovereign Immunity, etc.)  or principles (such as  federalism, fundamental right to contract) might bar the exercise of the  power ο Two approaches for tests on CC: Formal v. Realist Formal approach Court examines statute and regulated activity to determine  whether or not objective criteria are satisfied I.e., whether or not goods cross state lines = formal  approach Ignores actual economic effects and actual legislative motivation Realist approach Attempts to determine: Actual economic impact of legislation, or Actual motivation of Congress  o Shreveport Rate cases (1914): o Both realist and formalist components:
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Realist: intrastate commerce can clearly affect interstate commerce, and  can be used to discriminate Formalist: "instrumentalities of interstate commerce" o Direct, Indirect, and Stream of Commerce Tests Formalism of C.J. Fuller in  Knight Manufacturing precedes commerce (and perhaps, retail succeeds  commerce?); temporal test National power where states cannot effectively act: If any state allowed monopolies (e.g., in exchange for % of profits in  taxes), then the other states couldn't regulate monopolies.  Does this justify  Congress' antitrust power? Streams of commerce Stafford v. Wallace : stockyards "only incident to this current the West to the East, and from one  state to another" "Public interest" realism: CC applies only to local businesses when a "public interest" is involved Only local enterprises affected with a public interest could be located in a  "stream of commerce" Cushman's theory that this realism underlied the S.C.'s formal  tests in this period Formalism applied: Ames:  a version of formalism leads to upholding lottery ban statute Hammer : a version of formalism led to invalidating a labor regulation 
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/17/2008 for the course LAW 534 taught by Professor Steiker during the Fall '07 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Page1 / 9

Doctrinal Con Law Summary - Steiker, Fall 2007 - Commerce...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online