When the Supreme Court hears arguments on Obamacare, you are likely to hear the names of several Supreme Court cases related to Congress’s power to regulate Interstate commerce.
Here are some of the most important ones:
Wickard v. Filburn (1942)
In 1938, Congress passed the Agriculture Adjustment Act which set quotas for how much wheat every farmer in the country was allowed to produce. When Ohio dairy farmer Roscoe Filburn grew more wheat than his quota allowed, the Department of Agriculture fined him $117 and put a lien on his property.
Filburn sued Agriculture Secretary Claude Wickard to prevent the government from seizing his farm. Filburn argued that since he used his wheat entirely for consumption on his own farm, it was not “commerce” that could be regulated by Congress pursuant to Article I Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
A unanimous Court found for the government. Justice Robert Jackson wrote for the majority, “Even if appellee’s activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce.”
Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States (1964)
In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act which, among other things, banned racial discrimination in public accommodations. The Heart of Atlanta motel, a 216-room facility located near two interstate highways, sued the federal government seeking a court order allowing them to continue their racial discriminatory practices.
Another unanimous court found for the government, holding that since approximately 75 percent of the motel’s clients were from out of state, and since it advertised out of state, there was no doubt the motel had entered interstate commerce.
United States v. Lopez (1995)
In 1990, Congress passed the Gun-Free Zone Schools Act which made possession of a firearm within 1,000 feet of any school illegal. Acting upon an anonymous tip, school authorities arrested high school senior Alfonso Lopez after he was found carrying a concealed .38 caliber handgun on campus.
Lopez moved to dismiss the federal criminal charges against him on the grounds that the U.S. Constitution does not grant Congress the power to legislate control over public schools.
The Court found for Lopez in a 5-4 decision, rejecting the government’s argument that possessing a firearm affected interstate commerce by imposing high financial costs upon society through higher insurance premiums. If the commerce power could extend to any activity distantly related to economic productivity, the Court reasoned, then there would be no limit on federal power.
United States v. Morrison (2000)
In 1994, Congress passed the Violence Against Women Act which, among other things, created a federal civil remedy for victims of gender-based violence.
In 1995, a female student at Virginia Tech filed a federal lawsuit for civil damages against two members of the football team pursuant to the Violence Against Women Act, alleging that she was raped. When the defendants sought to dismiss the suit, claiming Congress had no power to create a federal cause of action for a criminal offense, the federal government intervened to defend the law.
In another 5-4 decision, the Court found for the defendants, holding that gender-motivated crimes of violence do not constitute commerce. For the majority, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote that “if the allegations here are true, no civilized system of justice could fail to provide [the plaintiff] a remedy for the conduct of…[defendants]. But under our federal system that remedy must be provided by the Commonwealth of Virginia, and not by the United States.”
Gonzalez v. Raich (2005)
In 1970, Congress passed the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act which, among other things, made it illegal to possess marijuana. After Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) agents destroyed Angel Raich’s marijuana plants in August 2002, Raich sued the government in federal court seeking an injunction preventing the DEA from seizing his marijuana again.
Raich claimed that the U.S. Constitution did not empower Congress to criminalize marijuana.
The Court found for the government in a 6-3 decision, holding that Congress does have the power to regulate the national pharmaceutical industry, including marijuana grown for personal consumption. The Court reasoned that locally grown marijuana did have a substantial effect on the national marijuana market.
U.S. v. Comstock (2010)
In 2006, Congress passed the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act which, among other things, allows the federal government to detain a sexually dangerous federal prisoner beyond the date that prisoners would otherwise have been released, if the government can prove, by “clear and convincing evidence,” that the prisoner is suffering from a mental illness that makes him a danger to others.
In November 2006, the federal government moved to keep Graydon Comstock, who was about to finish a 37-month sentence for possession of child pornography, in custody. Comstock moved to dismiss the civil-commitment procedure against him, arguing that nothing in the Constitution gave Congress the power to create it.
A 7-2 majority upheld Comstock’s continued detention, finding that while the power to enact laws governing prisoners is not mentioned in the Constitution, it does identify federal crimes (including counterfeiting, treason, and piracy) which would necessitate the founding of prisons. The Court found that the regulation of those already in federal custody is “rationally related” to Constitutionally enumerated powers, and therefore is authorized by the Necessary and Proper clause of Article 1 Section 8.
