Author Question: Wickard v. Filburn concerned the ability of Congress to impose controls on wheat growing, including ... (Read 84 times)

faduma · **on:** Jun 24, 2018

Wickard v. Filburn concerned the ability of Congress to impose controls on wheat growing, including a small farm that produced a small amount of wheat for use on the farm. This case shows how ______ :
a. Congress can regulate almost any form of commerce, even if the impact on interstate commerce is tiny
b. Congress cannot regulate almost any form of commerce, even if the impact on interstate commerce is tiny c. Congress can regulate agriculture within a state if it concerns a basic food crop
d. Congress has special privileges for regulating wheat growing e. none of the other choices are correct

Question 2

Wickard v. Filburn concerned the ability of Congress to impose federal controls on wheat production, including a small farm that produced only 239 bushels of wheat, all for use on the farm. The Supreme Court held that the controls were:
a. unconstitutional since the matter agriculture is exempted from regulation
b. unconstitutional since such a small amount was insufficient commerce, but the regulations could be written to apply to all active sellers in the wheat market
c. unconstitutional since all of the wheat was sold or used within the state
d. unconstitutional since none of the wheat was sold; all wheat was used on the farm e. none of the other choices