Discover published sets by community

The decision established that the power to regulate interstate commerce was granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.

Expanded the Commerce Clause to allow Congress to regulate activities that, taken in the aggregate, have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, even if individual cases seem local or trivial.

This decision identified limits to Congress's power under the Commerce Clause, by ruling that the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 was unconstitutional as it exceeded Congress's authority.

Both cases upheld the Civil Rights Act of 1964, deciding that discrimination in public accommodations could be regulated by Congress as it affects interstate commerce.

Upheld Congress's authority to prohibit the local cultivation and use of marijuana under the Commerce Clause, due to the economic activity's substantial effect on interstate commerce.

This decision reinforced United States v. Lopez by holding that possession of a gun near a school is not an economic activity that has a substantial effect on interstate commerce, thus falling outside Congress's power.

Determined that the Commerce Clause allowed Congress to regulate monopolies that restrained interstate commerce, specifically in the meatpacking industry.

The Court upheld the National Labor Relations Act, asserting that Congress could regulate labor relations because labor disputes could have a significant impact on interstate commerce.

The case confirmed that Congress's power under the Commerce Clause extends to regulation of local activities if those activities are part of a class that affects interstate commerce, such as loan shark operations.

Decided that states cannot discriminate against other states' waste, as doing so impedes on the Commerce Clause by hindering free trade among states.

Affirmed that states could regulate aspects of interstate commerce if Congress was silent on the issue, particularly in cases that require diversified local solutions.

The Court ruled that a state's effort to restrict the interstate shipment of goods (in this case, milk) for the purpose of protecting local economic interests violates the Commerce Clause.

The Court determined that states cannot place undue burdens on interstate commerce, striking down Iowa's truck size limitations that would affect long-haul trucking through the state.

The decision invalidated a Massachusetts law that imposed taxes on milk produced out of state but not on local milk, ruling it as discriminatory against interstate commerce.