ACTIVITY SUBSEQUENT TO INTERSTATE COMMERCE

Authors

Elcanon Isaacs, Of the Cincinnati, Ohio Bar

Abstract

With the commerce clause as the basis of distinction, courts have divided business into two classes, that which is interstate and that which is not. The first is considered to involve transportation across state boundary lines; the second is referred to business in which the crossing of state lines is not a factor. It must appear, however, in a consideration of the second class, that activity which is local because it has never involved movement requires a different approach from activity which is local because transportation has ended. The former must be analyzed for its intrinsic nature; it may even fall short of what is described as doing business. The latter presupposes that business has been done and presents a question of constitutional law. In other words, in order to make the relation between interstate commerce and doing business clear, we must distinguish at least four categories of activity, namely, activity (1) which is antecedent to interstate commerce or which never involves it; ( 2) which merges into and becomes such commerce; (3) which emerges again and develops into what has been called an essentially local act, and (4) which has emerged into an essentially local act but which remains, nevertheless, incidental or appropriate to commerce between the states.

Recommended Citation

Elcanon Isaacs, ACTIVITY SUBSEQUENT TO INTERSTATE COMMERCE, 25 Mich. L. Rev. 740 (1927).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol25/iss7/3