Business Law Essay

Ogden was brought in front of Chief Justice, John Marshall (New York State Library, “Steamboat Timeline”). He will examine the Commerce Clause of Article 1, section 8 (“McBride, “Landmark Cases”). The clause read that “Congress shall have power to regulate commerce among the several states.” They first examined the word “commerce” which meant more than just articles of interstate trade but also, how the articles will navigate among the states (“McBride, “Landmark Cases”). This is where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Commerce Clause states that the federal government has the power to govern the interstate commerce among several states (“McBride, “Landmark Cases”). The decision invalidated the monopoly that the New York Legislature granted to Livingston, Fulton and especially to Ogden (McBride, “Landmark Cases”). As the result of this ruling, in-state licensing on waterways ended and competition was encouraged. This delighted Vanderbilt. This ruling will later benefit Vanderbilt when he leaves Gibbons to start his own steamboat business n 1829

Narrow construction is not found in the Constitution, but the powers granted to Congress to regulate commerce are found. Exactly stated, "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes." This clause has no definite interpretation, but has included many aspects of regulating. The word "commerce" is defined as the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place (Webster 264). Congress has exercised this delegated power in many cases. The nature and basic guidelines of Congress' power over commerce is first laid out in the case of Gibbons v. Ogden. In addition, the case United States v. Lopez is a

The Commerce Clause grants Congress the power “[t]o regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” Despite its silence as to the effect of that affirmative power, federal courts have recognized the Framers’ wish to create a unified national market and have found a dormant congressional authority in it. Since the landmark case of Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), that dormant authority has limited state regulations that burden interstate commerce, even in the absence of congressional regulation. Congress has the power only to restrict the scope of permissible state regulation but it does not absolutely preclude states from affecting commerce. "[T]he states retain authority under their police powers to regulate matters of 'legitimate local concern', even though interstate commerce may be affected." A challenged statute is upheld if its effect on interstate commerce is merely incidental. On the other hand, a state regulation that is facially or practically discriminatory will be defeated unless it shows a legitimate local purpose that cannot be accomplished by any less discriminatory alternatives.

Narrow construction is not found in the Constitution, but the powers granted to Congress to regulate commerce are found. Exactly stated, “Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.” This clause has no definite interpretation, but has included many aspects of regulating. The word “commerce” is defined as the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place (Webster 264). Congress has exercised this delegated power in many cases. The nature and basic guidelines of Congress’ power over commerce is first laid out in the case of

The original writers of the Constitution had to have noticed the overlap in enumerated powers. Having only the Commerce Clause or only the Tenth Amendment would not harbor the best outcomes. Both are entirely necessary and exist to limit each other. Discretion is the deciding factor for determining which power trumps the other. In McColloch v. Maryland, for example, a state tax on the U.S. Bank would cause negative externalities against all citizens of other states. This is not in the best interest of the majority, or even Maryland in the long haul, to tax the US Bank. The key is to reach the best outcome in terms of majority. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Article I gives three main powers to Congress, and those were restated by the Supreme Court in Perez v. United States. Firstly, Congress can regulate the channels of interstate commerce. Secondly, Congress has the authority to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce and persons or things in interstate commerce. Thirdly, Congress has the power to regulate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. However, the last step is at interest regarding this topic because it draws attention towards the participation/non-participation about the Affordable Care Act that could potentially affect interstate commerce. This is concerning because although the local activities implied in the third power do not directly participate in interstate commerce, all local activities within the U.S

The dormant commerce clause means that the national government has the exclusive authority to regulate commerce that substantially affects trade and commerce among the states. This also means that the states do not have the authority to regulate interstate commerce.

Federalism is a system of government where the national government shares power with equally sovereign regional governments. The commerce clause allows the National government to regulate commerce international and interstate. This allows the government to keep control and manipulate laws into their favor. In the other hand, the sovereign states gain power and remain sovereign through the tenth amendment. This amendment gave the states all powers not delegated to the federal government. States have powers to make laws about schools, marriage, safety y, and health. In 1824, the case of Gibbons V. Ogden came to the Supreme Court. The court case pertained to fact that Robert Fulton was granted a monopoly for steamboats on the Hudson River.

The Constitution limits the power of congress through a system called Enumerated power. The Enumerated Power only belonged to the Federal government. The power created federal courts, foreign trade and coin money. The Enumerated power also provided an army and a navy, because they wanted to maintain a navy to make rules for the government. The

Even when Congress has taken no action in regard to a matter, the _____ or ______Commerce Clause may impose restrictions on state action.

exclusive power of regulating interstate commerce. With the decision of this case in 1824, any

The Dormant Commerce Clause affects state laws that might impede on Federal Commerce power. Any validly enacted federal law will trump any state law, this is not the case here because Congress has not taken action that might override or preempt State action under the Supremacy Clause. Western. When a state regulates non-discriminatorily for the achievement of a legitimate local purpose that affects interstate commerce, the state action is constitutional unless the burden(s) of the regulation outweigh the benefit(s). Philadelphia.

Concurring (Justice Johnson): Justice Johnson argued that original power to regulate commerce existed solely to the states under the Articles of Confederation. The states were sovereign and had the power to regulate their own commerce. Justice Johnson later argues that states no longer uses the Article of Confederation and must comply with the powers under the Constitution. Which he explains is absolute and has divine power, and the power to regulate commerce is solely the right of Congress.

The opinion of Justice BINDEROFF: According to Article I, Section 8(3) of the United States Constitution, Congress is granted the power “to regulate commerce with foreign countries, as well as among the several states…;” this enumerated power is what the Commerce Clause describes. This Article has been used to justify many instances in which Congress has exercised its power to regulate commerce, especially among states. In this regard, there has been a myriad of instances in which such exercise of this congressional power has been challenged. The first instance, was in the case of Gibbons v Ogden (1984), where two men who had been given exclusive licenses by the state of New York to carry passengers to Elizabeth Town from New York, filed a suit in court to block another steamship operator, Gibbons, who had been newly granted a license to carry passengers on that very route, from competing with them. In this case, the Chief Justice found out that Congress was right within its powers – granted by the Commerce Clause - to grant the ferrying license to Mr. Gibbons. The Chief Justice, Marshal, argued that commerce was more than just the selling and purchase of goods, but included other parts of the commercial intercourse between states, such as transport. The argument by the Chief Justice in this context is important in understanding the extent of commerce that falls under the Commerce Clause as intended by the framers.

The second paragraph of the article refers to the Dormant Commerce Clause. It is important to understand what the dormant Commerce Clause states. The clause, also called negative Commerce Clause, is a doctrine not enumerated in the Constitution according to which: states may not interferes with interstate commerce whether or not the Congress has acted on the matter. The interest of the doctrine is to protect interstate commerce from the discrimination of local economic protectionism. In order to discuss this topic, the professor, refers to the US Supreme Court “United Haulers Assn., Inc. v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mgmt. Auth” and “C&A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of