In Article I of the Constitution, the Legislative Branch is formed, and with it are its enumerated powers, such as the power to collect taxes and coin money. Perhaps the most crucial power given to Congress is to regulate commerce between states, foreign nations, and Indian tribes. With this Congress can control anything that directly affects the flow of commerce, i.e. discrimination based on race. Even if Congress sometimes uses this ability to over step their boundaries of commerce, such as United States v. Lopez, their main prerogative is to guarantee the stream of commerce and protect the citizens.
In the Constitution, the Founders gave Congress the exclusive power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, …show more content…
There are three different uses of this power as a police power that benefit citizens and the economy. A police power was not given to Congress by the Constitution, but it is a broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause. The first is people can travel freely between states, and not having to worry about changing currency. As a result, it encourages citizens to travel and spend their money on whatever they want and in different states. Not only do citizens benefit, but also all types of businesses. For example, a citizen from California decides to travel to Michigan. They have to buy snow supplies, such as chains for their car tires and snow jackets, which gives Michigan’s businesses a chance to increase revenue. Another reason Congress’ power is beneficial is it puts certain regulations on the work force and in the work place, such as the Fair Labor Standards of 1938. This banned interstate commerce for the trading and shipping of business that employed children labor. Thus, protects citizens’ health, safety, morals, and welfare. The last beneficial result of Congress power is it can protect the rights of citizens, such as in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This act forbids any business, restaurant, hotel, etc. from discriminating a person based on race, which directly affects interstate commerce. Discrimination affects commerce because it limits where people can …show more content…
There two strong cases where the Supreme Court of the United States ruled Congress did not have the authority to act through their power of commerce. The first case is United States v. Lopez (1995), which involved the Gun-Free School Act of 1990. Congress decided it was in their authority to pass this act because it involved regulating interstate commerce in firearms. The Supreme Court struck down this Act because having a firearm in a school zone did not have a direct affect on interstates commerce. The second case was United States v. Morrison (2000), which involved the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. This Act was to help prevent gender-based violence, and Congress indicated domestic violence and rape had numerous affects on commerce. However, Chief Justice Rehnquist’s ruling was crimes of violence against women had no direct influence on commerce, and Congress had no authority to relate a criminal offense to an economic affect. Both cases are evidence that Congress sometimes use their commerce power inappropriately. Congress genuinely needs to differentiate between establishing a law that affects commerce and a law that has no relation to commerce. In United States v. Lopez (1995), Judge Clarence Thomas calls for Congress to use the Commerce
In the Constitution, the Founders gave Congress the exclusive power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, …show more content…
There are three different uses of this power as a police power that benefit citizens and the economy. A police power was not given to Congress by the Constitution, but it is a broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause. The first is people can travel freely between states, and not having to worry about changing currency. As a result, it encourages citizens to travel and spend their money on whatever they want and in different states. Not only do citizens benefit, but also all types of businesses. For example, a citizen from California decides to travel to Michigan. They have to buy snow supplies, such as chains for their car tires and snow jackets, which gives Michigan’s businesses a chance to increase revenue. Another reason Congress’ power is beneficial is it puts certain regulations on the work force and in the work place, such as the Fair Labor Standards of 1938. This banned interstate commerce for the trading and shipping of business that employed children labor. Thus, protects citizens’ health, safety, morals, and welfare. The last beneficial result of Congress power is it can protect the rights of citizens, such as in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This act forbids any business, restaurant, hotel, etc. from discriminating a person based on race, which directly affects interstate commerce. Discrimination affects commerce because it limits where people can …show more content…
There two strong cases where the Supreme Court of the United States ruled Congress did not have the authority to act through their power of commerce. The first case is United States v. Lopez (1995), which involved the Gun-Free School Act of 1990. Congress decided it was in their authority to pass this act because it involved regulating interstate commerce in firearms. The Supreme Court struck down this Act because having a firearm in a school zone did not have a direct affect on interstates commerce. The second case was United States v. Morrison (2000), which involved the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. This Act was to help prevent gender-based violence, and Congress indicated domestic violence and rape had numerous affects on commerce. However, Chief Justice Rehnquist’s ruling was crimes of violence against women had no direct influence on commerce, and Congress had no authority to relate a criminal offense to an economic affect. Both cases are evidence that Congress sometimes use their commerce power inappropriately. Congress genuinely needs to differentiate between establishing a law that affects commerce and a law that has no relation to commerce. In United States v. Lopez (1995), Judge Clarence Thomas calls for Congress to use the Commerce