This question requires you to compare a Supreme Court case you studied in class with one you have not studied in class. A summary of the Supreme Court case you did not study in class is presented and provides all of the information you need to know about this case to answer the prompts.
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964)
Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbade racial discrimination by places of public accommodation if their operations affected commerce. The Heart of Atlanta Motel in Atlanta, Georgia, refused to accept Black Americans. The government sought to enjoin the motel from discriminating on the basis of race under Title II.
The Commerce Clause extends the anti-discrimination provisions in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to hotels that host travelers from outside the state. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Clark, the Court held the government could enjoin the motel from discriminating on the basis of race under the Commerce Clause. Since the motel was positioned near Interstates 75 and 85 and received most of its business from outside Georgia, this showed that it had an impact on interstate commerce, which is all that is needed to justify Congress in exercising the Commerce Clause power. Justices Black, Douglas, and Goldberg concurred in a separate opinion.
3. Respond to parts A, B, and C.
Identify the constitutional clause that is common to both United States v. Lopez (1995) and Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964).
Explain how the facts in United States v. Lopez and Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States led to different holdings.
Explain how the holding in Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States reflects the concept of federalism.
00:00