Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 

Supreme Court of the United States

1964

Chapter

2

Title

Federalism at Work

Page

210

Topic

The Evolution of Commerce Clause Doctrine

Quick Notes

o         In this case a restaurant just off an interstate highway was accused of racial discrimination in violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The restaurant argued that the law should not apply to them because they were not engaged in interstate commerce and were therefore beyond the reach of the Interstate Commerce Clause.

o         On a decision similar to Heart of Atlanta Motel, the US Supreme Court found that racial discrimination had a "restrictive effect upon the interstate travel of [African Americans]." Therefore the law was within Congress' authority under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Court Response In Darby, Disagreed

o         Congress has determined for itself that refusals of service to [African Americans] have imposed burdens both upon the (1) interstate flow of food and upon the (2) movement of products generally.

Book Name

Constitutional Law : Stone, Seidman, Sunstein, Tushnet.  ISBN:  978-0-7355-7719-0

Issue

o         Whether a local restaurant that practices discrimination is subject to Congresss reach and usage of  the Interstate Commerce Clause?  Hell Yes.

Procedure

District

o         District Court concluded that there was no connection between discrimination and the movement of interstate commerce.

Supreme

o         District Court was in error in concluding that there was no connection between discrimination and the movement of interstate commerce.

Facts

Discussion

Key Phrases

Rules

Pl Katzenbach

Df McClung

Party Description

o          Companion case to Heart of Atlanta Motel.

o         It involved Ollie's Barbecue, which is a family-owned restaurant in Birmingham, Alabama.

o         Specializes in barbecued meats and homemade pies, with a seating capacity of 220 customers.

o         It is located on a state highway 11 blocks from an interstate one and a somewhat greater distance from railroad and bus stations. (Possible interstate commerce traffic)

o         The restaurant caters to a family and white-collar trade with a take-out service for [African Americans]. (Burden on interstate commerce)

o         It employs 36 persons, two-thirds of whom are [African Americans].

o         70K or the 150K spent on meat is purchased from local suppliers who purchase from out of state.  (Interstate Commerce)

Restaurant Challenge

o         Challenged the constitutionality of applying Title II of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Justice Clark

Congressional Testimony

o         Discrimination in restaurants had a DIRECT and HIGHLY restrictive effect upon interstate travel by [African Americans].

Not served on premises

o         Discriminatory practices prevent [African Americans] from buying prepared food served on the premises while on a trip, except in isolated and unkempt restaurants and under most unsatisfactory and often unpleasant conditions.

Discourages travel, obstructs interstate commerce

o         This obviously discourages travel and obstructs interstate commerce for one can hardly travel without eating.

Deters Professionals and Industry from moving to State

o         Discrimination deterred professional, as well as skilled, people from moving into areas where such practices occurred and thereby caused industry to be reluctant to establish there.

Court Sufficient Support (Sold less interstate, because of discrimination)

o         This was sufficient support for the conclusion that established restaurants in such areas sold less interstate goods because of the discrimination.

o         Interstate travel was obstructed directly by it.

o         Business in general suffered

o         Many new businesses refrained from establishing there as a result of discrimination.

Court District Court ERRED

o         Hence the District Court was in error in concluding that there was no connection between discrimination and the movement of interstate commerce.

Restaurant Argued Insignificant Volume of Food Purchased

Court Response Agreed when compared with the total food stuffs moving in commerce.

Restaurant Argued Case by case determination

o         The Constitution required a case-by-case determination judicial or administrative that racial discrimination.

Court Response In Darby, Disagreed

o         Congress has determined for itself that refusals of service to [African Americans] have imposed burdens both upon the (1) interstate flow of food and upon the (2) movement of products generally.

Court Comment Investigation Ending

o         Where we find that the legislators, in light of the facts and testimony before them, have a rational basis for finding a chosen regulatory scheme necessary to the protection of commerce, our investigation is at an end.

o         The only remaining question -- one answered in the  [**384]  affirmative by the court below -- is whether the particular restaurant either serves or offers to serve interstate travelers or serves food a substantial portion of which has moved in interstate commerce.

Court - Congress had Rational Basis for finding Racial Discrimination

o         We must conclude that [Congress] had a rational basis for finding that racial discrimination in restaurants had a direct and adverse effect on the free flow of interstate commerce.

Court - Congress prohibited discrimination

o         Congress prohibited discrimination only in those establishments having a close tie to interstate commerce, i. e., those, like the McClungs', serving food that has come from out of the State.

o         We think in so doing that Congress acted well within its power to protect and foster commerce in extending the coverage of Title II only to those restaurants offering to serve interstate travelers or serving food, a substantial portion of which has moved in interstate commerce.

CONCURRING Justice Black

o         We do not consider the effect on interstate commerce of only isolated, individual, local event, without regard to the fact that this single local event when added to many others of a similar nature may impose a burden on interstate commerce by reducing its volume or distorting its flow.

o         There are 20 million African Americans in our country.

o         It would seriously discourage their travel if local sellers of interstate food are permitted to exclude all [African American] customers.

o         Congress has constitutional power under the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses to protect interstate commerce from the injuries bound to befall it from these discriminatory practices.

Rules

Class Notes