Skip to main content

View Diary: Getting It: Interstate Commerce & the New Deal (290 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't think I agree. (none)
    These cases don't go as far as Wickard.  Well, Katzenbach almost does, but the policies of common carriers and inns affect interstate commerce much more directly than the planting of wheat.  They were governed by special rules even at common law.  And requiring a business to serve people without regard to race (even Ollie's Barbeque) is a direct regulation of commercial interactions in the market.  Filburn's wheat (supposing it wasn't for sale) was subject to federal legislative jurisdiction just because, if lots of farmers had done as he did, it would have reduced the demand for (and therefore the price of) the wheat the government was permitting people to grow.  If this aggregation doctrine were struck down, lots of federal legislative power would go with it, but I don't think Ollie's Barbeque would be able to go all-white again.

    Join the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy:

    by yella dawg dem on Tue Dec 14, 2004 at 06:47:41 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site