Commerce Clause Case Study

Introduction The inception of the Commerce Clause has led over the years the Supreme Court to explore the limitations of the power of the federal government. The interpretation of the Commerce Clause in cases like the United States v. Lopez, United States v. Morrison et. al. and Gonzales v. Raich provide examples of the limits of the federal government. This case discussion first touches on the Supreme Court’s position regarding the Commerce Clause before the Lopez and Morrison cases. Afterwards, the Lopez and Morrison cases undergo an examination in an attempt to explain soon afterwards the reasoning the decision behind the Gonzales v. Raich case.
Prior to Lopez, Morrison and Gonzales The Commerce Clause as cited in Art. 1 sec. 8 cl. 3 “regulate[d] Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes” (Rosenbloom, 2015, p. 36). Before the 1930s, the Commerce Clause was restricted to the transportation, buying, and bartering of products (Rosenbloom, 2015, p. 36). In an attempt to recover from the Depression in the 1930s, President Roosevelt sought for the federal government
Morrison The United States v. Morrison case involved a woman named Brzonkala allegedly raped by Crawford and Morrison. All individuals in this case where students of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Originally, a school hearing handled the case that prosecuted Morrison and Crawford under the Sexual Assault Policy. The results of the first hearing found Morrison guilty and Crawford innocent based on insufficient evidence. However, the school determined that prosecuting these individuals under the Sexual Assault Policy was an error. As a result, there was, a second hearing conducted. The Judicial Committee found Morrison guilty and suspended him for two semesters. Once again, Morrison appeals the decision of the Judicial Committee and the Judicial Committee “set aside Morrison’s punishment” (U.S. v. Morrison, 2000,