Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Commerce Clause describes an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3).The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes".
The Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act is a 2015 Arkansas act that prohibits, with exception to employees of a local government, any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state from adopting or enforcing an ordinance, resolution, rule, or policy that creates a protected classification or prohibits discrimination on a basis not contained in state law.
Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that dramatically increased the regulatory power of the federal government. It remains as one of the most important and far-reaching cases concerning the New Deal, and it set a precedent for an expansive reading of the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause for decades to come.
The Dormant Commerce Clause, or Negative Commerce Clause, in American constitutional law, is a legal doctrine that courts in the United States have inferred from the Commerce Clause in Article I of the US Constitution. [1] The primary focus of the doctrine is barring state protectionism.
The district court sustained the defendants' demurrer and dismissed the indictment, holding that "the business of insurance is not commerce, either intrastate or interstate" and that it "is not interstate commerce or interstate trade, though it might be considered a trade subject to local laws either State or Federal, where the commerce clause ...
Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1 (1824), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which held that the power to regulate interstate commerce, which is granted to the US Congress by the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, encompasses the power to regulate navigation.
Nothing in the purposes animating the Commerce Clause prohibits a State, in the absence of congressional action, from participating in the market and exercising the right to favor its own citizens over others.” [3] Thus, while state laws that prefer intrastate commerce to interstate commerce for economic protectionism are ordinarily invalid ...
Twenty years earlier, in 1914, the U.S. Supreme Court had set limits on price discrimination that were effectively interstate commerce in Houston, East & West Texas Railway Co. v. United States. The railway was setting lower prices for intrastate carriers within Texas while charging more for carriers that were going through or out of the state.