When you come across a Federal Law ask: From what
provision of the Constitution is Congress is deriving its power?
The Commerce Clause (used for almost all
economic regulations) : Article 1, § 8, cl. 3:
Congress may regulate commerce with foreign
nations, Indian tribes and among the several
states
Federal Commerce Clause Test
First: Is Congress regulating
an existing commercial
activity? (Sebelius)
Congress has to power to regulate commercial activity,
not inactivity (the Commerce Clause presupposes an
activity that is already in existence to regulate)
Congress cannot compel a person to
engage in commerce (ex: in Sebelius, the
Court explained that the commerce clause
powers cannot be used to justify a law
requiring a person to purchase insurance)
Therefore, if Congress is regulating a
pre-existing activity, move on to the next
step.
Second (Lopez/Morrison Test)
-Under the Commerce Clause
Congress may regulate under the
following 3 situations:
1. Channels of interstate commerce
Anywhere commerce occurs; highways,
railroads, airways, the internet (Gibbons
v. Ogden)
2. Instrumentalities, people, or things moving in
interstate commerce Things that facilitate/move in
interstate commerce: trucks, planes, computers, goods,
information (Katzenbach v. McClung (meat moving in
interstate commerce) and Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S.
(people moving in interstate commerce)))
3. intrastate activities that
substantially affects interstate
commerce (consider the following 5
factors)
A. Is the activity economic or
commercial in nature?
B. Does the law include a jurisdictional
statement limiting the reach of the law?
C. Has Congress provided findings regarding
the effect of the activity on interstate
commerce?
D. Does the activity have a sufficiently close
connection/relationship to interstate commerce
or is it too attenuated? (more than a but-for
causation test)
E. Is this an area traditionally reserved
to the states? (crime, education, health,
ect..)
Third: ONLY if you are under the 3rd prong
of Lopez/Morrison (intrastate activities that
substantially affects interstate commerce)
When determining whether the activity is economic
or commercial in nature and discussing the
causation factor (under the 3rd prong of
Lopez/Morrison), you can discuss the aggregate
effects test, as stated in Gonzales:
Congress may regulate purely local activities that are
part of an economic “class of activities” that have a
substantial effect on interstate commerce when taken
aggregately.
Ask yourself: if all people were to engage in the
same local activity on a national level, would it
substantially affect interstate commerce
Congress can regulate a purely intrastate activity that is not itself
“commercial,” in that it is not produced for sale, if it concludes that
failure to regulate that class of activity would undercut the regulation
of the interstate market in that commodity.
Nota:
Ex:
In Gonzales, the plaintiffs were producing
marijuana for their own consumption (not available for sale), therefore, if
you were to apply the Lopez/Morrison test, you would find their activity to NOT
be economic or commercial in nature. However, applying the aggregate effects
test, if everyone who uses marijuana was to produce their own for consumption,
this would undercut the interstate market (supply/demand) in the commodity
After you decide which category the regulation falls under
Lopez/Morrison, the law will be sustained unless the
challenger can show that Congress had no rational basis for
the law.
Necessary and Proper Clause-Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 18 Congress may choose
any means that are “necessary” and “proper” for carrying out its
enumerated powers, so long as it is rationally related to a legitimate
government interest. This is not an independent grant of constitutional
power.
After you have derived the enumerated power from
which Congress may (or may not) pass a particular law,
consider State Sovereignty/10th Amendment issues.