The Process of Ipo

The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, and Clause 3. The Clause states that the United States Congress shall power, “To regulate Commerce with Foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” The Commerce Clause represents one of the most fundamental powers delegated to Congress. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Lopez and reversed his conviction, holding that, “Section 922, in the full reach of its terms, is invalid as beyond the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause” (Source 1.)

The SEC assists in providing investors with reliable information upon which to make investment decision. The Securities Act of 1933 requires most companies planning to issue new securities to the public to submit a registration statement to the SEC for approval. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 provides additional protection by requiring public companies and others to file detailed annual reports with the commission. Smackey Dog Food, need to file next forms:

The Commerce Clause grants Congress the power “[t]o regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” Despite its silence as to the effect of that affirmative power, federal courts have recognized the Framers’ wish to create a unified national market and have found a dormant congressional authority in it. Since the landmark case of Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), that dormant authority has limited state regulations that burden interstate commerce, even in the absence of congressional regulation. Congress has the power only to restrict the scope of permissible state regulation but it does not absolutely preclude states from affecting commerce. "[T]he states retain authority under their police powers to regulate matters of 'legitimate local concern', even though interstate commerce may be affected." A challenged statute is upheld if its effect on interstate commerce is merely incidental. On the other hand, a state regulation that is facially or practically discriminatory will be defeated unless it shows a legitimate local purpose that cannot be accomplished by any less discriminatory alternatives.

However such legislation has raised considerable concern as to whether the changes to legislation are necessary, constructive or simply a thin veneer displaying the government’s statement of intent.

The Commerce Clause was originally designed for congress to regulate commerce among the states. After this decision, Congress can now go beyond the external boundary (Smith, pg. 317). Being one of Chief Marshall 's most important cases, Gibbons v. Ogden vastly expanded the Commerce Clause (Smith, pg. 315). The case of Gibbons v. Ogden in 1824 allowed Congress to interpret their powers to regulate any type of commerce that went through state lines including modes

“There must be a strict supervision of all banking and credits and investments; there must be an end to people’s speculation with other money (pg 92).” The SEC was designed to keep security on Wall Street.

This means that the law making powers belong only to congress,

Allows Congress to create all kinds of legislature, if they can relate it to interstate commerce; enacted with elastic clause, enables

The dormant commerce clause means that the national government has the exclusive authority to regulate commerce that substantially affects trade and commerce among the states. This also means that the states do not have the authority to regulate interstate commerce.

Does the Supreme Court have the right to use the Commerce Clause, under Article I Section VIII, when dealing with the constitutional right of interstate commerce?

2). The Commerce clause gives congress power to control the purchasing and selling with foreign nations and among the states.

Commerce Clause The commerce clause is located in Article 1, Section 8 and clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution. According to the commerce clause, the Federal government has the right to regulate commerce among the U.S. and foreign nations and some states. The commerce clause has led to great controversy for many years. The commerce clause gives congress authority to legislate in many areas or address a broad range of issues.

Marshall is considering raising money for his business by selling stock in the company. The law that governs this transaction is the statutory and administrative law at both the federal and state level. Anytime practices involve selling company stock to the public; it becomes a security law (Melvin & Katz, 2014). According to the legal information institute at Cornell University (1992), administrative law encompasses laws and legal principles that govern and regulate government agencies. These rules occur for both the federal and state. Statutory law is involved in this because it deals with the executive branch enacted by the legislature as stated before.

The opinion of Justice BINDEROFF: According to Article I, Section 8(3) of the United States Constitution, Congress is granted the power “to regulate commerce with foreign countries, as well as among the several states…;” this enumerated power is what the Commerce Clause describes. This Article has been used to justify many instances in which Congress has exercised its power to regulate commerce, especially among states. In this regard, there has been a myriad of instances in which such exercise of this congressional power has been challenged. The first instance, was in the case of Gibbons v Ogden (1984), where two men who had been given exclusive licenses by the state of New York to carry passengers to Elizabeth Town from New York, filed a suit in court to block another steamship operator, Gibbons, who had been newly granted a license to carry passengers on that very route, from competing with them. In this case, the Chief Justice found out that Congress was right within its powers – granted by the Commerce Clause - to grant the ferrying license to Mr. Gibbons. The Chief Justice, Marshal, argued that commerce was more than just the selling and purchase of goods, but included other parts of the commercial intercourse between states, such as transport. The argument by the Chief Justice in this context is important in understanding the extent of commerce that falls under the Commerce Clause as intended by the framers.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Retrieve from: https://www.sec.gov/about/laws/soa2002.pdf. October 27, 2014.