![]() Since it never entered commerce at all, much less interstate commerce, he argued that it was not a proper subject of federal regulation under the Commerce Clause. He maintained, however, that the excess wheat was produced for his private consumption on his own farm. He admitted producing wheat in excess of the amount permitted. Roscoe Filburn was a farmer in what is now suburban Dayton, Ohio. During 1941, producers who cooperated with the Agricultural Adjustment program received an average price on the farm of about $1.16 a bushel, as compared with the world market price of 40 cents a bushel. In the absence of regulation, the price of wheat in the United States would be much affected by world conditions. Such plans have generally evolved towards control by the central government. Such measures have been designed, in part at least, to protect the domestic price received by producers. The four large exporting countries of Argentina, Australia, Canada, and the United States have all undertaken various programs for the relief of growers. Importing countries have taken measures to stimulate production and self-sufficiency. ![]() Many countries, both importing and exporting, have sought to modify the impact of the world market conditions on their own economy. The decline in the export trade has left a large surplus in production which, in connection with an abnormally large supply of wheat and other grains in recent years, caused congestion in a number of markets tied up railroad cars, and caused elevators in some instances to turn away grains, and railroads to institute embargoes to prevent further congestion. Largely as a result of increased foreign production and import restrictions, annual exports of wheat and flour from the United States during the ten-year period ending in 1940 averaged less than 10 percent of total production, while, during the 1920s, they averaged more than 25 percent. The wheat industry has been a problem industry for some years. The parties have stipulated a summary of the economics of the wheat industry. The Supreme Court's decision states that the parties had stipulated as to the economic conditions leading to passage of the legislation: It was motivated by a belief by Congress that great international fluctuations in the supply and the demand for wheat were leading to wide swings in the price of wheat, which were deemed to be harmful to the U.S. Its stated purpose was to stabilize the price of wheat in the national market by controlling the amount of wheat produced. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 limited the area that farmers could devote to wheat production. Therefore the Court decided that the federal government could regulate Filburn's production. Although Filburn's relatively small amount of production of more wheat than he was allotted would not affect interstate commerce itself, the cumulative actions of thousands of other farmers like Filburn would become substantial. Congress "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." The Court decided that Filburn's wheat-growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for animal feed on the open market, which is traded nationally, is thus interstate, and is therefore within the scope of the Commerce Clause. The Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution's Commerce Clause, in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, which permits the U.S. But even if appellee's activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce and this irrespective of whether such effect is what might at some earlier time have been defined as 'direct' or 'indirect.'" The Supreme Court disagreed: "Whether the subject of the regulation in question was 'production', 'consumption', or 'marketing' is, therefore, not material for purposes of deciding the question of federal power before us. In response, he said that because his wheat was not sold, it could not be regulated as commerce, let alone "interstate" commerce (described in the Constitution as "Commerce. Filburn grew more than was permitted and so was ordered to pay a penalty. government had established limits on wheat production, based on the acreage owned by a farmer, to stabilize wheat prices and supplies. Īn Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed animals on his own farm. The goal of the legal challenge was to end the entire federal crop support program by declaring it unconstitutional. Constitution's Commerce Clause for decades to come. It remains as one of the most important and far-reaching cases concerning the New Deal, and it set a precedent for an expansive reading of the U.S. 111 (1942), is a United States Supreme Court decision that dramatically increased the regulatory power of the federal government.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |