The [[United States Supreme Court ]] decided the case of <i>'''Wickard v. Filburn'''</i> on November 9, 1942, capping a long line of cases establishing the unfetterred unfettered power of the United States Congress. Although <i>Wickard v. Filburn</i> is little known by the public and even politicians, it is considered one of the most important Supreme Court cases implementing a dramatic transformation of the U.S. Constitution under "New Deal" of then President [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]]. For identification purposes, it is assigned the citation codes of 317 U.S. 111 (1942).<ref>317 U.S. 111 (1942) [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=volpage&court=us&vol=317&page=127]</ref><ref>[http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0317_0111_ZO.html]</ref>
Prior to the election of Roosevelt to the Presidency, the U.S. Supreme Court had sharply limited the power of Congress to regulate life throughout the United States. The Constitution empowers Congress to regulate "interstate commerce," but does not empower Congress to regulate commerce within an individual state, nor to regulate any other form of activity other than "interstate commerce."
Despite this, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the regulation as constitutionally authorized under the power to regulate interstate commerce. The Court's reasoning was that the growing of wheat that never entered commerce of any kind, and did not enter interstate commerce, nevertheless potentially could have an effect upon interstate commerce. That is, had Farmer Filburn not grown his own wheat to fed his cattle, he would have bought wheat, which might have been intra-state commerce purely within Ohio, but could possibly have traveled in inter-state commerce.
The court in effect ruled that growing crops on ''one's own'' property, to feed ''one's own'' livestock, while neither "interstate," nor "commerce," is "Interstate Commerce." As to whether this ruling "bears any fidelity to the original constitutional design," University of Chicago Law School Professor Richard Epstein comments:
{{cquote|''Wickard'' does not pass the laugh test.<ref>Richard Epstein, "[http://ricochet.com/main-feed/ObamaCare-is-Now-on-the-Ropes ObamaCare is Now on the Ropes]," ''Ricochet'', December 13, 2010</ref>}}
This "economic effects" theory of the regulation of interstate commerce resulted in every area of American life being subject to regulation under the clause of the U.S. Constitution empowering Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
The [[Supreme Court]] also indulged in significant discussion in the opinion of why the regulation was desirable from a policy and economic perspective.
==NotesReferences==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
[[Category:Commerce Clause]]
[[Category:federalism]]