Reference no: EM132308161

COMMERCE CLAUSE- The Commerce Clause (CC) of the Constitution says that Congress has the right to regulate commerce between the states. The first time the Supreme Court really considered this power was when Robert Fulton, inventor of the steam boat, entered into a contract with the state of New York. NY and Fulton agreed that if Fulton would provide steam boat service to move goods around the state of NY, NY would ban all other steam boat companies from operating in NY waters. Other steam boat operators sued, and the Supreme Court said NY could not regulate trade between the states by prohibiting steam boat companies from bring goods into NY from other states. This set the standard for the Commerce Clause. However, the Court expanded the CC dramatically, especially during the civil rights movement in the 1960's. In one case the Court struck down a Georgia law that allowed hotels to ban African Americans saying that not allowing African Americans from other states to stay in hotels would limit their ability to do business in Georgia. In another case, the Court banned an Alabama law that allowed restaurants to restrict African Americans to eating their food on tables outside rather than eating inside. However, the Court refused to expand it in a Texas case. In Lopez, the U.S. Congress had a law that made bringing a gun to a school a serious crime. The state of Texas had a similar law, but the punishment was much less severe. The U.S. asked the Court to strike down the Texas law on the basis of the CC. The U.S. said that if a businessman wanted to move to Texas from a state that isn't as enamored with guns as Texas, that might make him not move to Texas and do business there. The Court said that was too much of a stretch. My question to you: How far should Congress be able to go in controlling what happens in interstate trade? Was the court right in Fulton? in the Georgia case? the Alabama case? the Texas case? Where and how do we draw the line?