9-25-06

Document Sample
9-25-06 Powered By Docstoc
					Champion (1903) (p.128)

Swift (1905) (p124)

"commerce"

"flow" or "stream" of IC
"among"

"regulate"

includes prohibition

state PP limitation on Cg's commerce  commerce power doesn't power apply to regulation of interstate shipments

other

Title: Sep 20­1:16 PM (1 of 6)

Shreveport Rate Cases (1914) (p. 120)

"commerce"

Hammer v. Daggenhart (1918) (p.125)

"among"

applies to local "regulate" activities that affect IC
commerce  power
even if act is within power on its face, invalid if Cg's true purpose is improper; here, true purpose--to regulate local manufacturing--was improper

other

Title: Sep 20­1:17 PM (2 of 6)

Stafford (1922) (p. 124)

RR Retirement Bd. (1935) (p.124)

"commerce"

"among"

applies to regulation of the "steam of commerce"

"regulate"

commerce  power

Cg's purpose still relevant

other

Title: Sep 20­1:17 PM (3 of 6)

Carter Coal (1936) (p.118)

NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel   (1937) (p.131)

"commerce"

not local manufacturing
"among"

"regulate"

commerce  power

applies to activities "substantially related" to IC

other

Title: Sep 20­1:17 PM (4 of 6)

US v. Darby (1941) (p. 134)

Wickard v. Filburn (1942) (p.136)

"commerce" "among" "regulate"

-purpose not relevant commerce  -"affects" test power -Hammer overruled

-applies to activities with only indirect economic effect on IC

-may regulate small individual acts if "aggregated" effect is substantial

other

10th Amendment merely confirms truism that Cg has only the enumerated powers

Title: Sep 20­1:17 PM (5 of 6)

Heart of Atlanta (1964) (p. 139)

Katzenbach v. McClung (1964) (p.141)

"commerce"

"among"

"regulate"

irrelevant that commerce  activity regulated traditionally under power local PP
other

Title: Sep 20­1:17 PM (6 of 6)


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Tags:
Stats:
views:88
posted:12/3/2008
language:English
pages:6