Does Congress Have Too Much Power Over Commerce?

Does Congress Have Too Much Power Over Commerce?

Works Cited Missing

Narrow construction is not found in the Constitution, but the powers granted to Congress to regulate commerce are found. Exactly stated, “Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.” This clause has no definite interpretation, but has included many aspects of regulating. The word “commerce” is defined as the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place (Webster 264). Congress has exercised this delegated power in many cases. The nature and basic guidelines of Congress’ power over commerce is first laid out in the case of Gibbons v. Ogden. In addition, the case United States v. Lopez is a prime example of Congress’ ability to carry out the Commerce Clause to the furthest extent. Lastly, the case National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation brings to light the Wagner Act of 1935. Through a review of these three cases, it can be concluded that there are no real limitations on Congress when regulating commerce.

The Constitution of the United States explicates the enumerated powers that the people have granted to their public administration. A narrow interpretation of the Constitution would mean denying the government the powers granted to them to keep order, equality, and fairness. An expanded interpretation would “extend words beyond their natural and obvious import, and we might question the application of the term…” (244). It is the government’s responsibility to exercise powers that cannot be exercised by its governed people. There are no guidelines in the Constitution’s composition that discloses how to interpret the language; therefore, it is in the hands of three federal branches of government to decipher the Constitutions meaning.

A historical case that first outlined Congress’ commerce power was Gibbons v. Ogden. The courts acted here, in view of commerce, to stretch the interpretation of what was considered to be within its limits. In 1807, steam navigation became productive way of doing things. Robert Fulton was the first to make the voyage from New York to Albany by steamboat. Fulton and his partner, Robert R. Livingston, were granted special operating rights and a “five-year extension to his monopoly, wh...

... middle of paper ...

...s on the Government’s power. It is the supreme law and any act that is inconsistent with it is null. The respondent’s argument that the Act “exceeds the authority of Congress” is a weak argument, which can be disproved by the Constitution, itself. Congress must be able to exercise stretching its powers in order to insure the safety of the economy.

According to law, Congress must “regulate commerce.” Some individuals might feel that the Government possesses too much power, but it is necessary for them to have it. Without it, our Government would be weak and subject to failure. State legislature acts should be unconstitutional if they interfere with interstate commerce. If not, we are giving more power to our states than our Government. Congress’ power to legislate control over public schools is constitutional because it is a power delegated to them. Regulation of activities in and affecting commerce does include carrying a handgun to school. The action of bringing it does directly violate the Gun Free School Zone Act, which the Federal Government made a federal offense. Congress analyzes activities in a broad sense so that in the end, they do what is best for every individual.