New Deal Breaks Through

By the mid 1930s some of the older Supreme Court Justices were stepping down. Naturally, President Roosevelt began packing the court with his own justices. This new court led to a new interpretation of the Commerce Clause, which grants Congress the power to regulate "interstate commerce". A broadening scope of Congressional authority led to an easier time for New Deal legislation.

The Former Supreme Court
Commerce is the buying and selling of goods. A business action has either interstate or intrastate effects. If the line is blurry, we'll deem it to be intrastate. We want to preserve state sovereignty whenever possible.

The New Supreme Court
Commerce includes the steps leading up to the actual buying and selling of goods. Congress can regulate things like labor agreements and manufacturing practices because they have an effect on commerce. If the line between interstate and intrastate effects is blurry, then obviously the action is interstate. Congress therefore has the power to regulate.

Briefs
The first two decisions overturn rulings from my last post. I'll list the relevant cases in parentheses. The final case puts forth a powerful new principle of aggregation that we will most likely be revisiting in the future.

NLRB v. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp. (1937)
(A. L. A. Schecter Poultry Corp. v. United States)
(Carter v. Carter Coal)

Facts
The National Labor Relations Act provided all workers with the right to join a union. Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp. were sued for firing employees who wanted to unionize. The company argued that the NLRB had no authority over the firings, because they were neither interstate actions nor commerce.

Questions
1. Are unions linked to commerce strongly enough to grant federal authority?
2. Do the layoffs have interstate effects?

Holding
1. Yes
2. Yes

Reasoning
1. Labor agreements affect the production of goods, which indirectly affect commerce. This link is sufficient to grant Congress authority.
2. Seventy-five percent of Jones & Laughlin's business is interstate. Although the layoffs themselves are intrastate, they affect interstate commerce.

U.S. v. Darby (1941)
(Hammer v. Dagenhart)

Facts
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 established regulations such as maximum hours and minimum wage for workers. Goods that were manufactured in violation of the FLSA could not cross state lines.

Question
Can Congress close channels of interstate transportation to combat intrastate violations?

Holding
Yes

Reasoning
Although the effects of barring intrastate transportation are indirect, they are an effective means to an end.

Wickard v. Filburn (1942)

Facts
The Agriculture Adjustment Act granted the Secretary of Agriculture power to regulate the industry. One regulation set standards for the maximum amount of wheat a farmer could legally grow. A farmer in Dayton, OH doubled his growing allotment. He did not sell any of the excess wheat. It was used to feed his family and animals.

Questions
Can the Commerce Clause apply to goods that never become part of commerce?

Holding
Yes

Reasoning
Filburn affected commerce because if he had not used his own wheat for home consumption, he would have been forced to buy wheat from someone else. Of course, his actions alone would have little effect on the wheat industry. But imagine the aggregate effect of all wheat farmers growing their own wheat. This would clearly have a significant effect on commerce.