Stafford v. Wallace 358 U.S. 495 (1922)
STAFFORD v. WALLACE 358 U.S. 495 (1922)
Seventeen years after swift & company v. united states (1905), the Supreme Court again approved the extension of federal authority to local activities. A nationalistic exposition of the commerce clause ran through the opinion in which the Court not only reaffirmed but also extended the stream of commerce doctrine. Commission men, who sold animals on consignment, sued to enjoin enforcement of the packers & stockyards act. They asserted that because they provided only "personal services" and were not engaged in interstate commerce, they were not subject to the act. For a 7–1 Court, Chief Justice william howard taft followed Justice oliver wendell holmes's opinion in Swift and sustained the act. Congress had acted reasonably in securing an "unburdened flow" of interstate commerce. Moreover, the stockyards were "not a place of rest or final destination … but a throat through which the current [of commerce] flows." Because the commission men were essential to maintaining this flow, their activities were properly part of interstate commerce and subject to the act. Justice james c. mcreynolds dissented without opinion. By reviving and reapplying the stream of commerce doctrine, the Court built a foundation on which the new deal would later support its economic regulations.
David Gordon
(1986)