1. Lecture 29 The Commerce Power
Part 6: The Expansive Era

2. This lecture We cover the expansive era of the Commerce Power
Pages

3. Civil Rights
After Wickard, the Court uses a rational basis test for commerce
But what about civil rights
Board v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954)
It had barred segregation in public education- at all due speed
Segregation still existed in the South after that- all areas of life
Congress passes a watered down civil rights bill in 1957
JFK had been working on a civil rights bill before he was assassinated
But with little in the way of results- he was more worried about the 1964 election
LBJ makes it a priority and it is passed in 1964

4. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964)
Background
Title II of the Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination in public accommodations operated in or affecting interstate commerce
This included hotels (or five or more rooms), restaurants, theaters, and facility located within
The hotel owner had a 216 room hotel in the middle of Atlanta
Close to two interstates and two major state highways
He advertised it for travelers to stay
He said he would continue not to serve blacks, even with the Civil Rights Act passage, which he believed to be unconstitutional

5. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States- II
Question:
Did Title II of the Civil Rights Act exceed Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause?
He had also made 5th Amendment and 13th Amendment claims
Arguments
For Heart of Atlanta (strike down the law)
Court should interpret the Constitution with the intent of the framers at the time
The framers intended to limit powers to the federal government that were not specifically delegated
The Courts have allowed Congress no limits in what it regulates today
Congress has not adequately described how this affects interstate commerce

6. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States- III
Arguments
For the United States (uphold the law)
Based on Wickard, Congress may consider the aggregate effect on commerce, not just the effect to one individual or business
Based on Champion, the Congress may use the commerce power to regulate social or moral wrongs, in addition to economic ones
Discrimination in public accommodations imposes a burden on movement in interstate commerce and imposes burdens on interstate travel
African-Americans traveling through these segregated states had to travel far outside their routes to find lodging, which reduced the number of persons involved in interstate commerce

7. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States- IV
Justice Clark ruled for a unanimous Court
With three concurrences by Black, Douglas and Goldberg
Basis of Congressional Action
The record was replete with evidence of burdens discrimination by race played in interstate commerce
Blacks were limited in where they could stay in a hotel
They sometimes could not find public accommodations or had to drive great distances out of their way to find them
There was plenty of testimony that showed how this effected interstate commerce

8. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States- V
More from Justice Clark
Power of Congress over Interstate Travel
He quotes Gibbons v. Ogden
The determinative test- “commerce which concerns more States than one” and has a real and substantial relationship to the national interest
Intercourse included movement of persons through states and it does not matter if the transaction is commercial or not
Congress has been able to regulate many things under the commerce clause
Including moral wrongs like segregation
Congress may regulate local incidents which may have a substantial and harmful effect on interstate commerce
The only caveat to the power- the means chosen must be reasonably adapted to the end permitted by the Constitution
It was up to Congress to determine the means

9. A few later cases There were a few sceptics on a few cases
Daniel v. Paul (1969)
This involved a club that was purely local and in the middle of nowhere
Justice Black dissented- saying it was a “Sleepy Hollow”
He thought the Commerce Power was going a bit too far
Perez v. United States (1971)
This involved an anti-loan sharking law
Perez said it was purely local loan sharking, but how do we know what is purely local?
Douglas said channels were being misused
Stewart say not rational relation and thought this was purely a local crime, thus not applicable to be regulated under the Commerce Clause

10. Next Lecture We will move into the Rehnquist Court Pages 472-484
We will break the Republican Court Era section in half