Regulation of Local, Non-Interstate, Non-Commercial Conduct OK’d

Congress’s power under the interstate commerce clause has been interpreted by a legion of court rulings to reach even non-commercial, local conduct that doesn’t cross state lines! Some of those rulings smack of judicial activism.

Here are some examples of rulings allowing even local, non-interstate activity to be regulated under the interstate-commerce clause:
(1) Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) (Supreme Court rules that farmer’s growing of grain on his own farm, for purposes of consumption, was subject to regulation under the interstate Commerce Clause);
(2) Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1 (2005) (Supreme Court rules that consumption of locally-grown medical marijuana not even sold, miuch less sold across state lines, can be banned under the interstate Commerce Clause);
(3) Perez v. United States, 402 U.S. 146 (1971) (Supreme Court rules that local loan-sharking activity can be banned under the interstate Commerce Clause);
(4) NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1 (1937) (Supreme Court rules local workplaces can be regulated under the interstate Commerce Clause).
(5) Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., 452 U.S. 264, 275 -283 (1981) (Supreme Court rules that local land-use can be regulated under the interstate Commerce Clause).