Wickard Vs Sebelius

To understand how the Supreme Court came to their decisions in the cases of Wickard v. Filburn, Gonzalez v. Raich, and the National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius one must first have a comprehensive understanding of the Commerce Clause in addition to the Necessary and Proper Clause to understand how Congress can execute authority over interstate commerce despite the 10th amendment which grants states sovereignty. The Commerce Clause is a statement within the United States Constitution that grants Congress the “power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes”. It is found in Article I, Section 8 Clause 3. The Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress the power “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution …show more content…
Raich (2005) arose following the passing of the Compassionate Use Act by California voters which allowed medical marijuana to be used. However, this act violated the Controlled Substances Act which was enforced by the Drug Enforcement Agency. Soon after the legislation was passed DEA agents seized medical marijuana from a private home. An advocacy group filed suit against the DEA and Attorney General. They argued that the Controlled Substances Act was a violation of Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce via the Commerce Clause. The court decided 6-3 that Congress had not exceeded their granted powers through the Commerce Clause. This being because the local use of the marijuana in California had an impact on the overall, national market, therefore, it was essential that Congress be able to regulate the drug. The court applied the aggregate and substantial effects tests used in Wickard v. Filburn. The marijuana can be interchanged with the wheat in this case because even if a medically approved patient grew the marijuana in his or her own home that has an effect overall on the market and therefore cannot be exempt from federal