Civil Rights Act Of 1964: The Heart Of Atlanta Motel

The Heart of Atlanta Motel, which discriminated in leasing its rooms on the premise of race, wanted a review of a judgment by attacking the lawfulness of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Heart of Atlanta Motel fought that in enacting the statue Congress surpassed its power to regulate commerce under the Commerce Clause, violating their Fifth and Thirteenth Amendments. “The Supreme Court decision was unanimous.” The Court supported the law. Justice Tom Clark was the justice who wrote for the Court. He pointed attention to that the Court had long supported Congress’s power to regulate interstate Commerce under the Commerce Clause. One of the cases referred to was Gibbons v. Ogden, decided in 1824. Starting with the 1930’s New Deal, Congress
frequently claimed authority to pass enactment under the Commerce Clause, and the Court typically upheld that power. Clark stated Congress could manage both interstate commerce and other inside a state to prohibit moral wrongs. The Court then presumed that places of public accommodation had no privilege to choose guest as they saw fit, free from legislative regulation. Everyone concurred that the Civil Rights Act doesn’t disregard their 5th and 13th Amendment.
Gibbons v. Ogden was a cited precedent case because it was the first cases to address the commerce clause of the Constitution. It was a U.S. Supreme case that held that the ability to control interstate commerce, Granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, encompassed the power to direct navigation.