What did the Supreme Court hold in Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States (1964)?The Court held that Congress could use the Commerce Clause powers to force private businesses to abide by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, Congress could outlaw discrimination in certain business open to the public because discrimination in places like hotels along the nation's highways had a substantial and negative effect on interstate commerce.
What is the modern approach to the Commerce Clause?Contemporary interpretations of the commerce power that allow Congress to regulate and protect the channels of interstate commerce, the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, and those activities that substantially affect interstate commerce.
What did the Supreme Court hold in National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (1937)?In this landmark decision, the Court ruled (5-4) that Congress has ability to regulate intrastate matters when they directly burden, threaten, or obstruct interstate commerce. Labor strife in the steel factory would disrupt the ''stream of commerce,'' and would have a direct effect on the flow of interstate commerce. Therefore, Congress has the power to regulate business conditions which may upset interstate commerce.
What was the court packing plan?Franklin Roosevelt's 1937 proposal to enlarge the Supreme Court by one justice for every sitting justice who had reached the age of 70. Billed by the president as a way to help the Court manage its workload, the proposal was actually a means for the president to select new justices who would be more inclined to approve his economic reforms. Congress failed to enact the plan.

What was the New Deal?The term given to the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt (1937-1945) who promoted extensive federal regulation of business and the economy.
What was the switch in time that saved nine?A reference to Justice Owen Roberts's 1937 change from opposing New Deal programs to supporting them. His modified position resulted in a Court majority that gave constitutional approval to new federal regulatory efforts. This switch, it is said, made Roosevelt's Court packing plan no longer necessary and thus saved the Court as a nine-justice institution.
What did the Supreme Court hold in United States v. Lopez (1995)?The Commerce Clause of the Constitution does not give Congress the power to prohibit mere possession of a gun near a school, because gun possession by itself is not an economic activity that affects interstate commerce even indirectly.
What did the Supreme Court hold in United States v. Morrison (1999)?Parts of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 were unconstitutional because they exceeded congressional power under the Commerce Clause and under section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Despite congressional findings on the impact of gender motivated violence on interstate commerce, the Court held the Commerce Clause did not authorize Congress to create a civil remedy for victims of gender-motivated violence.

What did the Supreme Court hold in U.S. v. Darby (1941)?The Court upheld the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, holding that Congress has the power under the Commerce Clause to regulate employment conditions. The decision overturned Hammer v. Dagenhart and confirmed the constitutionality of minimum wage laws of general application.
What did the Supreme Court hold in Wickard v. Filburn (1942)?The Court upheld provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 which regulated the production of wheat (in order to stabilize prices). The Court decided that Filburn's homegrown wheat reduced the amount of wheat he would buy on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, his excess production affected interstate commerce.
What did the Supreme Court hold in Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1985)?The Court held that the Congress has the power under the Commerce Clause to extend federal labor regulations to state and local governments. The labor regulations applied to both public and private employers, overruling a previous decision of the Court which had held that regulating activities of state and local governments "in areas of traditional governmental functions" would violate the Tenth Amendment.
What did the Supreme Court hold in Gonzalez v. Raich (2005)?The Court ruled that under the Commerce Clause, Congress may criminalize the production and use of home-grown cannabis even where a state approved its use for medicinal purposes.

What did the Supreme Court hold in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012)?This landmark decision addressed a number of constitutional arguments. With respect to the claim that Obamacare's "individual mandate" exceeded congressional authority under the Commerce Clause, the Court held (5-4) that requiring individuals to participate in commerce was not a regulation of commerce. (The mandate was allowed by other powers of Congress).