A New Approach to Congressional Power: Revisiting the Legal Tender Cases
Gerard N. Magliocca
Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law
Georgetown Law Journal, November 2006
This Article proposes a new doctrinal test for assesing the scope of Congress's authority under the Commerce Clause and Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. To clarify the muddled state of the law following the Supreme Court's decision in Gonzales v. Raich, the analysis reviews the precedents and shows that the operative standard in implied power disputes comes from the three Legal Tender Cases and not, as is commonly supposed, from McCulloch v. Maryland. Two of these cases on the validity of paper money set forth approaches that are invoked by the Court today. One says that the Justices should defer to congressional judgments about the affirmative scope of its power absent extraordinary circumstances. The other says the Court should balance the importance of a federal interest in regulation against any countervailing state interests.
The third framework discussed in the Legal Tender Cases, however, is not part of the current debate. That test holds that an exercise of federal power outside the core of an enumerated end should receive heightened scrutiny only when it is in the vicinity of a specific constitutional prohibition (i.e., when there is a colorable claim that a concrete right is affected). As the Article explains, this test offers a compromise that can protect important structural and textual principles without giving the Court unbounded discretion to displace national action.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 107Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: December 17, 2004 ; Last revised: February 15, 2012
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.421 seconds