what exactly is your definition of commerce then?the reason things are controlled at the federal level is so that there are uniformity and consistency across state lines. this is why we are called the United States. Lets use the example of Europe, which with the establishment of the EU made things uniform across country lines to promote trade. this was modeled after the US. as we move good and services across state line. the commerce clause allows for the fed to regulate those good and services. if we did not have uniformity with interstate products, the states would need to have individual agreements with other states, and thus would not have to honor certain states laws or regulations. what if say the DMV was returned to the state level. and california had one standard and nevada had another. to be even more specific, ca driving age was 18 and NV was 16. would california be forced to accept nevada law?
If I gave you an issue to read about, would you do it? Seriously. I want to just give you a reference, you do the research and tell me what conclusion you come to about the Commerce Clause. There is a very specific reason the commerce clause was inserted into the Constitution. Commerce does not mean goods and services either, which is the entire problem. Look up the Potomac Company.
Mike
according to websters dictionary. Commerce is defined as (2) the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place
Commerce - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
a commodity is defined as
(1) A raw material or primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee.
(1) A useful or valuable thing, such as water or time.
The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." Courts and commentators[who?] have tended to discuss each of these three areas of commerce as a separate power granted to Congress. It is not uncommon to see the individual components of the Commerce Clause referred to under specific terms: The Foreign Commerce Clause, the Interstate Commerce Clause,[1] and the Indian Commerce Clause.
Commerce Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
how does the 10th amendment apply in overruling the commerce clause? the 10th amendment reads: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
not sure why you want me to look at a mergers and acquisitions company, but they provide a service. thus if they provide that service in several states they can be regulated under the commerce clause. if they only operate in one state, then the commerce clause would not apply.
It is not my definition or yours that matters. It is what the definition was and what was meant by the people who ratified the Constitution. The reason the Commerce clause was introduced was because of controversy over the Potomac River (circa 1784-1787). Virginia was trying to tax all goods that went over the river from Maryland. Commerce did not mean regulate goods, it was the transportation of goods that the writers and ratifiers of the Constitution understood the word to mean. It was specifically to prevent the states from taxing goods as they crossed state lines. It wasn't until the Marshall court (mid 1820's) that the commerce clause was ever interpreted to mean anything else. He interpreted it almost correctly but said something in his opinion (this is all from memory, look up the opinion on Gibbons v. Ogden for the intimate details. I have to go to bed in a min or I would do it for you). He actually overturned the authority of the FG to interfere but was kind of vague. Using his words (roughly 50 years later) they inspected steamboats cargo going from state to state using the Commerce clause. 90 years after the Commerce clause was written, somebody had a new interpretation.
Mike