Regardless what FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to think about the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers when they decided Wickard v. Filburn in Congress’s favor, FDR’s justices wrongly ignored the following imo.
They ignored that previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate the INTRAstate commerce activities of these professions.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." -Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited. None to regulate agricultural production is given, and therefore legislation by Congress for that purpose is forbidden [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Only when buyer and seller of farm and ranch-related products are domeciled in different states or nation does Congress have constitutional authority to regulate commerce imo.
Corrections, insights welcome.
Thanks for posting.