The Possibility of Pretext Analysis in Commerce Clause Adjudication
Gil Seinfeld
Abstract
Open-access reader
Gil Seinfeld
Abstract
Open-access reader
The federal government has passed three laws. One prohibits restaurant owners from discriminating on the basis of race, one prohibits the possession of a firearm within 1000 feet of a school zone, and one creates a civil remedy, enforceable in federal court, for victims of gender-motivated violence. Question: The justifications offered by the federal government for these provisions have been rooted in what constitutional value? Answers: Commerce; Commerce; Commerce.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The federal government has passed three laws. One prohibits restaurant owners from discriminating on the basis of race, one prohibits the possession of a firearm within 1000 feet of a school zone, and one creates a civil remedy, enforceable in federal court, for victims of gender-motivated violence. Question: The justifications offered by the federal government for these provisions have been rooted in what constitutional value? Answers: Commerce; Commerce; Commerce.
Key concepts: Pretext, Adjudication, Law, Commerce Clause, Dormant Commerce Clause, Political science, Business, Supreme court