Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by willcipriano 1886 days ago
Wickard v. Filburn pretty much ended the idea of any real limitations in regards to calling something interstate commerce:

"An Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed animals on his own farm. The US government had established limits on wheat production, based on the acreage owned by a farmer, to stabilize wheat prices and supplies. Filburn grew more than was permitted and so was ordered to pay a penalty. In response, he said that because his wheat was not sold, it could not be regulated as commerce, let alone 'interstate" commerce'..."

Roscoe lost.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

1 comments

> Wickard v. Filburn pretty much ended limitations in regards to interstate commerce.

It did not, illustrated by among others, US v. Lopez.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1994/93-1260

How would they claim this isn't a economic activity?