Preview

What Is The Commerce Clause?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
481 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
What Is The Commerce Clause?
Over the course of our time the commerce clause has been a primary source for regulatory expansion of the nation’s government. This leads me to my first question. What is the Commerce Clause? The Commerce Clause which can be found in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of our Constitution states that it gives congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among several states, and with the Indian Tribe. In the business world this clause tends to have the most impact over any other clause that is stated in the United States Constitution. It was merely placed in our Constitution to ensure that states could not establish laws or regulations that would hinder with trade and economic commerce.

The term “commerce” means business or commercial exchanges in any and all of its forms between citizens in different states. These exchanges may take place in
…show more content…

For example, one of the first major challenges to practice this clause was in 1824, which was the Gibbson vs Ogden case. In this case the State of New York passed a law that allowed Robert Fulton and Robert Livingston a monopoly on steamboat traffic on the Hudson Bay. Fulton and Livingston stopped boats that operated without their support and forced them to get permits. Aaron Ogden had a license from the State of New York to travel from New York City to New Jersey. Ogden then found himself having to compete with Thomas Gibbson who had been granted permission to use this path by the Federal Government. The State of New York refused to give Gibbson the right away to the Hudson Bay, so in retaliation he sued Ogden. The case ended up going before the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice John Marshall made it known in this case that the intent of the Constitution was to have congress, not the states, regulate interstate commerce. His decision ruled that congress could under the Constitution regulate activities that affected the interstate

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Gibbon v Ogden decision One of the most important decision of the early Supreme Court. The New York legislature had passed a law giving a monopoly to steamship travel to a group of New York investors. Among the investors given permission in this monopoly was Aaron Ogden. Thomas Gibbon another steamship trader wanted to use New York's water ways to do his business to. Gibbon Gibon believed he should be able to use these waterways because of permission given to him by the federal government. Gibbon was denied the use of the waterways. Because of Gibbon being denied access he decides to sue Ogden and the supreme court decides the verdict. The final verdict was reached on March 2, 1824 and it stated that the supreme court holds all power over interstate…

    • 149 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In foreign relations, the government set down by the Articles of Confederation had minimal, if any, control and authority over diplomatic efforts with Spain, France, Britain, and the foreign presences in America. One contributing factor to this was the lack of an executive branch. Congress was the chief coordinating agency of any war efforts and almost every action of meaning. During a disagreement over foreign policy, the argument could possibly have lasted for weeks with no decision or compromise set, leaving the problem standing unresolved. What authority Congress did have over commerce was shown in some unfair tariffs on foreign trade, that consequentially affected foreign relations. There was a marked decline in the estimated market of United States exports to Great Britain; in those, there was a definite per capita drop [Document B]. There was much difficulty with diplomatic efforts with other countries. For example, while negotiating a treaty with Spain that…

    • 927 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The plaintiff (or petitioner) was Thomas Gibbons, owner of a rival steamboat company based i Elizabethtown, NJ. Gibbons was represented by one of the most famous lawyers of early America, Daniel Webster. Webster argued on behalf of Gibbons that the federal law was supreme above all state laws. Furthermore, the federal government's laws superseded state laws because of the Constitution's granted to Congress the right to control interstate…

    • 69 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    The landmark case that opened up the ability for business to operate across state lines was Gibbons v. Ogden. The case started in 1809, when the Legislature of the State of New York granted exclusive navigation privileges of all boats that moved by fire or stream in the waters within the jurisdiction of the state, for twenty years, to Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton (Livingston). They wanted a monopoly on a national network of steamboat lines, but were unsuccessful in their pursuit. Only the Orleans Territory awarded them a monopoly on the lower Mississippi (Livingston).…

    • 1646 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    However, he began to gain exposure to business practices and techniques as he ferried passengers and cargo in the Manhattan area. Then when Vanderbilt began to work as business manager under Thomas Gibbons, his first outlook on competitive business enterprise started to become apparent. When the New York Legislature granted Livingston and Fulton the charter of exclusive steamboat navigation between New York and New Jersey, the business of Gibbons and Vanderbilt was threatened. The decision to continue business on these exclusive waters spurred a controversy that became the landmark Supreme Court decision, Gibbons v Ogden. Gibbons and Vanderbilt, who also had a similar appeal to the Supreme Court, both had the attitude that Congress had the right “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;” (Article 1, Section 8, United States Constitution). Because Congress had the control over interstate commerce, they believed that they were justified in competing against the Livingston…

    • 1298 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In his case, Homer Adolph Plessy v. The State of Louisiana, Plessy argued that the state law which required East Louisiana Railroad to segregate trains had denied him his rights under the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. However, the judge presiding over his case, John Howard Ferguson, ruled that Louisiana had the right to regulate railroad companies as long as they operated within state boundaries. Plessy sought a writ of…

    • 589 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The decision to regulate interstate commerce grew mostly out of the rebate, and long-haul, short-haul discriminations of the railroads. The growing feeling that the business were running their businesses only to end in a monopoly is led the Congress to…

    • 711 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mcculloch V. Maryland

    • 470 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In many ways, the opinion in this case represents a final step in the creation of…

    • 470 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marbury vs. Madison- James Madison, the new secretary of state, had cut judge Marbury's salary; Marbury sued James Madison for his pay. The court ruled that Marbury had the right to his pay but, the court did not have the authority to force Madison to give Marbury his pay. Most importantly, this decision showed that the Supreme Court had the final authority in determining the meaning of the Constitution.…

    • 678 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The landmark case of McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819 unanimously ruled that the Constitution allowed Congress to establish the National Bank. The Court also asserted that the Constitution did not allow a state to tax the Bank. Chief Justice John Marshall stated that the Constitution does not explicitly grant Congress the right to establish a national bank, but also noted that the "necessary and proper" clause of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to do that which they felt was best for the country. Therefore, the Court affirmed the existence of implied powers.…

    • 565 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Commerce and Slave Trade Agreement: Now the Congress was scared that the abolishonists, the industrial northern representatives, would try to change the slave laws in the south and add a stronger export tax on the agricultural southern tobacco. So, the congress decided that the governmentcould not interfere with slave laws for the first twenty years after the adoption of the constitution and that there would no longer be an export…

    • 295 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The night before John Adams left the presidential office he appointed various men to be Justices of the Piece. All of these men were Federalist like himself. One of which was William Marbury. However, when Thomas Jefferson came into office he refused to give the men that had been appointed last minute by Adams their federal commission. Jefferson used his secretary of state, James Madison, to be his voice about the situation. Enraged William Marbury and others sued the government and the case went to the Supreme Court. One of the members of the Supreme Court was the recently appointed Chief Justice John Marshall.…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marbury v. Madison (1803) case was the beginning of the corrupt theories of John Marshall. William Marbury had been a “midnight judge” appointed by John Adams in the last hours of being president. Marbury had been named Justice for Peace for the District of Columbia, but when Secretary of State James Madison shelved the position, he sued for its delivery. Chief Justice Marshall knew that his Jeffersonian rivals, deep-rooted in the executive branch, would not attempt to enforce a writ to deliver the commission to Federalist Marbury. He therefore dismissed Marbury’s suit. Despite the dismissal of the case, Marshall snatched a victory from this judicial defeat. In explaining his ruling, Marshall said that part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 on which Marshall tried to base his appeal was unconstitutional. This attempted to assign the Supreme Court power that the Constitution had not anticipated. This act by Marshall attempted the shift of power to the Supreme Courts for his benefit. This greatly magnified the authority of the court.…

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jackson Dbq

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Throughout the Jacksonian era the Jacksonians proved to be violators of the United States Constitution and not the guardians they believed themselves to be. Both the Jacksonians and President Jackson went against the Supreme Courts regarding cases that were said to be constitutional. An instance in which the Jacksonian Democrats violated the Constitution was in the "Trail of Tears". The Supreme Court stated that the Jacksonian Democrats' actions were unconstitutional because they had issued the "Indian Removal Act". By doing this, they were in violation of the treaty of New Echota. In the 1832 decision Worcester v. Georgia, Chief Justice Marshall ruled that the Cherokees had their own land and that they did not need to follow Georgia law in their own territory. This ruling of the Supreme Court did not stop Jacksonians from driving the Cherokees off of their land. Jackson used the Constitution to benefit himself when he vetoed the national bank, even after the Supreme Court had already ruled that the bank was constitutional. When South Carolina declared a reduced tariff void and threatened to secede, President Jackson responded in an unconstitutionally. He threatened to send militia to enforce the tariff and the Jacksonian Congress passed a bill approving this military force, if necessary. This was in direct violation of the Constitution. They continued to violate the Constitution by placing censors on the mail and intercepting abolitionist literature or mail into or from the south. This was an infringement on the Constitution because it violated the first amendment.…

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Calhoun argued against the Tariff of 1828, which imposed a tax on imported goods high enough to protect domestic producers from foreign competition. Northern manufacturers benefited from the tax, while Southern planters who depended on international trade suffered. Calhoun argued that a protective tariff was unconstitutional, and that states, not the Supreme Court, were the rightful judges of the constitutionality of laws.…

    • 575 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays