- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 12,533
- Reaction score
- 3,364
@waiguoren
Here's some dicta in Gibbons v Ogden which helps illustrate my point on the ICC.
Justice Marshall, writing for majority:
"It is not intended to say that these words [ICC clause] comprehend that commerce which is completely internal, which is carried on between man and man in a State, or between different parts of the same State, and which does not extend to or affect other States. Such a power would be inconvenient, and is certainly unnecessary." pg 22 at 194
"The enumeration presupposes something not enumerated, and that something, if we regard the language or the subject of the sentence, must be the exclusively internal commerce of a State. The genius and character of the whole government seem to be that its action is to be applied to all the external concerns of the nation, and to those internal concerns which affect the States generally, but not to those which are completely within a particular State, which do not affect other States, and with which it is not necessary to interfere for the purpose of executing some of the general powers of the government. The completely internal commerce of a State, then, may be considered as reserved for the State itself." (my emphasis). at 195
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/22/1/case.html
Here's some dicta in Gibbons v Ogden which helps illustrate my point on the ICC.
Justice Marshall, writing for majority:
"It is not intended to say that these words [ICC clause] comprehend that commerce which is completely internal, which is carried on between man and man in a State, or between different parts of the same State, and which does not extend to or affect other States. Such a power would be inconvenient, and is certainly unnecessary." pg 22 at 194
"The enumeration presupposes something not enumerated, and that something, if we regard the language or the subject of the sentence, must be the exclusively internal commerce of a State. The genius and character of the whole government seem to be that its action is to be applied to all the external concerns of the nation, and to those internal concerns which affect the States generally, but not to those which are completely within a particular State, which do not affect other States, and with which it is not necessary to interfere for the purpose of executing some of the general powers of the government. The completely internal commerce of a State, then, may be considered as reserved for the State itself." (my emphasis). at 195
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/22/1/case.html