Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States

1. Rule of Law

1.1. Commerce Clause

2. Analysis

2.1. Plaintiff: The owner violate commerce clause because customer base might come from all over the place. In addition, owner advertise nationally. These might occurs that they might discriminate interstate customers. Defendant: The owner argues that his business is pure local and not engaged with interstate commerce Court: The court pointed out that 75% of the customers from Heart of Atlanta Motel were from outside of the state which can applies to commerce clause.

3. Conclusion

3.1. The court conclude that the business activities in Heart of Atlanta Motel involved a lot of interstate travelers which violate commerce clause. In addition, all people shall receive equality in goods and services and accommodations without discrimination of race, color or religion.

4. Importance

4.1. This case set a tone that congress has the power can regulate business if it against commerce clause over state. In this case, the case set an equal environment for business that can't use illegal practice to strengthen their competition against other competitors from other states

5. Facts

5.1. Parties: Heart of Atlanta Motel, Government

5.2. What Happened: Heart of Atlanta Motel refused to offer rooms for African Americans

5.3. Procedural History: At district court, court rule out the owner violate commerce clause due to 75% of his customer were from outside the state. Owner of the motel appeal to US Supreme Court (People won) Supreme court hold the result and owner violate interstate commerce clause.(People won)

6. Issue

6.1. Did refusing customer in this case violate commerce clause or dormant commerce clause

7. Impact

7.1. Katzenbach v. McClung Restaurant owner not allow African Americans not allow to dine in in the restaurant. However, court pointed out that materials from restaurant are made from other states so that involves interstate commerce Perez v. United States Credit collection business involved interstate commerce.

8. Influence

8.1. Restaurant and hotel industry no longer has the excuse to refuse or discriminate customers regarding their race and religion Logistic industry is not allowed to regulate vehicle size or other things to over protect local business