Shopping Bag

0 item(s) in cart/ total: $0    view cart
Free Instant Delivery  |  No Sales Tax
Home > Case Law > Constitutional Law  >  Congressional Regulation of Intrastate Commerce
Congressional Regulation of Intrastate Commerce
Congressional Regulation of Intrastate Commerce Cartoons

Congressional Regulation of Intrastate Commerce

Gonzales v. Raich; Medical marijuana; Prescription marijuana; THC; Congress may regulate intrastate activity if there is a rational basis for concluding that the activity may have a substantial effect on interstate commerce; necessary and proper clause.
Your Price: $10.00

Select Usage (details) :

Related Cartoons

Claims Against Foreign Governments
Claims Against Foreign Governments
Dames and Moore V. Regan; The President has the power to suspend pending claims against foreign governments where such action is necessary to the resolution of a major foregin policy dispute and where Congress has acquiesced.
Line Item Veto Act
Line Item Veto Act
Clinton v. City of New York; Use of Line Item Veto Act to cancel spending for a budget item violates the Constitution by permitting the virtual amendment of Congressional acts by the President.; delegation doctrine.
Economic Regulation
Economic Regulation
Williamson v. Lee Optical; Economic regulation is constitutional if there exists some hypothetical rationale for the legislation.
Race Based Admissions to State Schools
Race Based Admissions to State Schools
Regents of University of California v. Bakke; Admissions programs of state schools may achieve diversity in the studenty body by considering the race of its applicants among other factors. Affirmative Action; Racial Quota System.
Obscenity
Obscenity
Miller v. Calfornia; Statutes barring obscenity must be drawn in enough detail to allow producers of obscenity to structure their conduct to comply with the law.
The First Amendment
The First Amendment
American Booksellers Association v. Hudnut; The First Amendment's interest in promoting free speech outweighs the possibility that an injury may occur as a result of the speech. State may not declare one perspective right and silence opponents.
Permitted Free Speech Regulations
Permitted Free Speech Regulations
United States v. O'Brien; A governmental regulation may restrict speech if the goal is unrelated to the suppression of free speech, and the incidental restriction on alleged First Amendment freedoms is no greater than essential to legitimate interest.
Public Employee Speech
Public Employee Speech
Connick v. Myers; When a public employee speaks not as a citizen but as an employee upon matters of personal interest, and that speech may cause disruption in the employee's office, the First Amendment usually does not protect.
Litigation as Political Expression
Litigation as Political Expression
NAACP v. Button; When litigation is used as a form of political expression the government may limit it only if there is a compelling state interest.
Detain Aliens
Detain Aliens
Demore v. Kim; aliens may be detained pending removal deportation.
Campaign Finance
Campaign Finance
Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett; Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Act; matching funds substantially burdens protected political speech without serving a compelling state interest and violates the First Amendment.
Phone Sex Regulations
Phone Sex Regulations
Sable Communications, Inc. v. FCC; pornography on telephone; sex talk; sexual messages; prurient interest; explicit; indecent; obscene; FCC regulations; Free Speech; First Amendment.

Browse Similar Items