Discrimination Case: Heart of Atlanta Motel Versus the United States

States have always been sensitive about the amount of power they have; the federal government has always had to step carefully around the demands of the states. This has been true since the beginning of the United States. But both believe that they should have the most power when it comes to certain things. Individual states have different values and as such tend to implement different laws about certain topics; such states want their state laws to reflect these individual values instead of a blanket law from the federal government. States should have less power compared to the federal government when implementing laws dealing with topics such as the legalization of marijuana, gay marriage, and abortion.

Each state has their own specific unique laws established individually for their state. In conjunction with those laws that exist over the people in their specific state there are also federal laws that govern the states as well as the people who live in them. These laws that govern the people are known as state laws and federal laws. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land in the United States. “It creates a federal system of government in which power is shared between the federal government and the state governments. Due to federalism, both the federal government and each of the state governments have their own court systems (Comparing

In the United States Constitution it is stated that “No single section of the constitution deals with federalism. Instead, the provisions dividing power between the states and the national government appear throughout the constitution. Most of the constitution is concerned with establishing the powers of the national government. National power is also based on the supremacy clause of article VI, which says that the constitution and laws made in accordance with it are “the supreme law of the land”. This means that when national and state laws conflict, the national laws will be followed. Article I, section 9 limits the power of the national government over individuals. The tenth amendment the constitution also limits the state powers in Article I, section10 and denies the states certain powers” (Keeping the

The case “Plessy v. Ferguson” was a test of a Louisiana law’s constitutionality. It took 50 years to realize it, but the constitutionally and morally right way was to end segregation. This case was never about Plessy not being able to ride on a white only car on a train headed to Covington, Louisiana. It was about a group of black citizens trying to stop segregation from ever

The United States government system is very interesting and complexly designed. The state and federal government is a mirror of each other when it comes to the generics of the executive branch, legislative branch, and judicial branch, however, internally the state government has major differences on how the branches are conducted. Throughout this paper we will discuss the greatest difference between state and federal, which is the state cannot change or remove laws passed by the federal government but they could change how they execute the federal laws to their liking as long as it is constitutional.

The federal government began to gain power, and in Article I section 8 says, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts and provide the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imports and excises shall be uniform through the United States; to borrow money on the credit of the United Staes; to regulate commerce with foreign nation, and among the several states, and with the Indians Tribes… to establish post offices and post roads .” The following quote describes how the national government has different kinds of power compared to federal government. Article IV section 1 says, “full faith and credit shall be given in each states to the public acts, records, and judicial proceeding of every other state. And the Congress may general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved… ” In simpler words, the state government has to follow laws just like a ordinary

When it comes to court cases, every case that is heard in court is heard for one reason or another.

Congress was unable to deal with issues of commerce. There was no way to impose a uniform tariff policy. The states were given the rights to make their own laws regarding tariffs and navigation. Consequently, many of the states had conflicting laws and collected taxes from each other. British manufactures also brought their surplus goods to the American market, so certain states “deliberately lowered their tariffs to attract

Since there is no text in the Constitution that states this the claims must be made by historical understanding and practice of the text. The people who are against this argue that in recent years that there has not been any precedent that relates to this kind of action. However they disagree with that and state there in fact has been the earliest congress had acts that also required state officials to participate in the enforcement of federal laws. They were doing so however since they did not know that power existed. The assumption that the federal government can command the state's executive power in the absence of a constitutional authorization is not indicated it is the opposite of that actually. Including that it has been around since the earlier is not true that there is some protection that the states have against this keeping their duty to keep their goals. The early legislation also has sources that indicate the original understanding of the Constitution. Alos that though they could and may be needed to regulate commerce they way the act was set up was not within its power to do so. They stayed with the old principle that states are not required to enforce it since state legislature is not required to follow or are a subject to federal direction. There is also a separation of powers that a state has and powers that the government

The heart of Atlanta Motel v United States was a very sensitive case during the 60’s with uprising of racial equality & separation. Under commerce clause with Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act shows congress didn’t unconstitutionally exceeded its power. The civil rights act of 1875 was a generic regulation that didn’t help race relations in the US against minority rights and race relations. White individual took advantage over black’s perpetuated inferior accommodations, entitlement, and services. The owner ignored the federal commerce clause and due process and based his action on his personal opinion and outspoken treatment of blacks at that time. The facts are that the appellant owns and operates the heart of Atlanta Motel which has 216 rooms available to non-blacks guest. The motel was readily accessible to motorist using United States interstate highways 75 and 85 and Georgia highway 23 and 41. Approximately 75 percent of the motel’s registered guest was from out of state. The federal government has laws and regulations to fight against racial discrimination in the United States. I believe if we try this today with social media that their business and anyone like it will loss business and boycott against. The purpose of opening a business is to make a profit, eliminate any legal action, and appeal to more paying customers regardless of your race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, according

The states can set up local governments, regulate in-state businesses and establish schools. As James Madison said, “The different governments will each control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” James Madison is trying to say is that the central and state governments have enough power that they don’t control everything. Federalism protects against tyranny because it balance out the power among the central and state governments.

Congress was responsible for foreign affairs, but had no way to regulate trade within the states or between the states and foreign countries. It also had no power to enforce foreign treaties. For example, in the peace treaty that had ended the American Revolutionary War, the treaty

It has been argued since the start of immigration whether or not aliens (undocumented or documented) should have the same equal rights as Americans when it comes to employment, education, and benefits in the United States. Despite what individuals believe or disbelieve, under certain acts, codes, laws, and the U.S. Constitution, all aliens have rights, regardless of their immigration status. In this paper I will discuss an overview of the court case, Patel v, Quality Inn South, which deals with an undocumented alien who was able to recover funds from his former employer. I will explain the acts that impacted the case, whether I agree or disagree with the outcome of the case, and my personal opinions of the case itself.

Heart of Atlanta v. United States (1964) - Any business that was participating in interstate commerce would be required to follow all rules of the federal civil rights legislation. In this case, a motel that wanted to continue segregation was denied because they did business with people from other states. This important case represented an immediate challenge to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the landmark piece of civil rights legislation which represented the first comprehensive act by Congress on civil rights and race relations since the Civil Rights Act of 1875. For much of the 100 years preceding 1964, race relations in the United States had been dominated by segregation, a system of racial separation

Karen Daniels , president of Borders Hotel Corporation (BHC) , has to investigate three financing alternatives in order to evaluate their impacts on viability of the BHC