Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964)
Facts:
• Ollie’s Barbecue - a restaurant in Birmingham, AL refused to serve African Americans since it opened.
• This treatment is a violation of the Civil Rights Act.
Issues:
• Whether Ollie’s Barbecue restaurant discriminated against African Americans or other skin colors – it is a direct violation the Civil Rights Act.
Rule:
• Congress can utilize the Commerce Clause forcing the restaurant to serve all skin colors to enable the flow of food and travel.
• Utilizing the Commerce Clause will enable interstate commerce.
Analysis:
• Evidence is found that Ollie’s Barbecue has discriminated against others causing an obstruction of the Commerce clause.
• Wickard v Filburns explains how the volume of food …show more content…
Bus. V Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012)
Facts:
• Affordable Care Act was directly attacked, forcing individuals to purchase health insurance coverage.
Issues:
• Whether the “individual mandate” part of the ACA actually requires individuals to purchase health insurance coverage violates the Constitution.
Rule:
• The individual mandate part of the ACA does not violate the Constitution because it is enacted as a tax.
• Individuals must purchase minimum level coverage health insurance to obey the law.
Analysis:
• Congress passed the ACA which came to be effective March 23, 2010.
• The ACA forced Americans to have health insurance at least at a minimum – forcing Americans to pay.
• Americans fought back saying that this was unconstitutional taxing powers, which lead to The Court getting involved to explain how the Individual Mandate in the ACA penalty is a tax pertaining to the constitution’s Taxing and Spending Clause to exercise Congressional authority. The Individual Mandate was decided to be constitutional and does not cause severe penalties since it is constitutional.
Holding:
• The Court held that it is constitutional to enforce the individual Mandate in the ACA.
Tennessee v Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)