Title & Citation: Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, 63 S. Ct. 82 (1941) Facts: Wickard, as Secretary of Agriculture, was ordered by Agricultural Adjustment Act to establish acreage allotments for growing wheat to stabilize production and prices. Filburn disobeyed the standard and was fined heavily. Filburn refused to pay, claiming the act violated the Commerce Clause and 5th Amendment. Legal Question: Does Congress have the Constitutional power to pass the Agricultural Adjustment Act and regulate agriculture grown for personal as well as commercial use? Yes. Holding: Reversed. Opinion from the Court: There should be no guideline installed concerning the direct or indirect effect an action has on interstate commerce to instruct the Court as to whether Congress has regulatory power over that action. Congress has the power to regulate the growth of one?s personal wheat if the action has an effect on the trade of the product in question. In this case, because of the delicate nature of the present economy, Congress can regulate the production of wheat in order to stimulate efficient production and trade. Although it may be disadvantageous to a particular individual, it is up to Congress to decide whether the advantages to the many are worth the disadvantages to the few. Since it is Congress? judgment Congress should have the power to regulate the system. Separate Opinions: None. Precedents Used: United States v. Darby (Held that government had power to regulate production of goods for commerce)
Want to see the other 1 page(s) in Wickard v. Filburn.docx?JOIN TODAY FOR FREE!