The New Deal jolted the commerce clause into high gear, creating the regulatory agencies, commissions, and boards that continue to oversee the United States' commercial life." During that administration, Roosevelt attempted to assert a lot of federal power that had not been previously asserted by the federal government. However, a number of such laws pressed through Congress were found by the U.S. Supreme Court to lack constitutional authority. For many of these pet endeavors, FDR claimed commerce clause authority.

Much of the disagreement with the law stems from the word " commerce." This is a very broad term and is the root word of commercialism. The Constitution does not explicitly define the word. Some would present the idea that it refers simply to trade or exchange, while others claim that the founders of this country and the writers of the document, intended to describe more broadly commercial and social intercourse between citizens of different states. Thus, the interpretation of "commerce" affects the appropriate dividing line between federal and state power.

With the advent of the New Deal, the powers of the federal government expanded into realms, such as regulation of in-state industrial production and worker hours and wages t hat would not necessarily be considered "commerce" under the definitions as a result, prior to 1937, the Court exercised its power to strike down New Deal legislation as applied...

Following his reelection, President Roosevelt responded to these attacks on his legislation by proposing what is known as the "Court-packing plan," which would have expanded the size of the Supreme Court from nine to up to fifteen justices. Although the plan was defeated and the composition of the Court soon changed, the proposal was credited with changing the Court's view on New Deal legislation.
The Commerce Clause in the Constitution is a very powerful tool that if argued with emphasis and tact, could severely limit the freedoms and laws that come from state and local governments. This centralization of power seems to oppose the rest of the Constitution's focus on individual rights and freedoms. As the law of the land, it is important that these ideals are still upheld even if they have been violated in the past such in times of the New Deal.

References

Cohn, J. (2012). Did Roberts Gut the Commerce Clause? New Republic, 28 June 2012. Retrieved from http://www.newrepublic.com/blog/plank/104455/did-roberts-gut-the- commerce-clause#

Donato, R. (2012). Commerce Clause and the New Deal. Chicago Business Review, 22 Sep 2012. Retrieved from http://hbr.org/2005/09/the-commerce-clause-wakes-up/ar/1

Downes, L. (2005). The Commerce Clause Wakes Up. Harvard Business Review, September 2005. Retrieved from http://hbr.org/2005/09/the-commerce-clause-wakes-up/ar/1