Is the target of the regulation an Is the commerce “interstate” (in

economic transaction (a.k.a. YES “stream of commerce,” relating to a YES Regulation

traditional “commerce”)? channel or instrumentality of VALID
interstate commerce)?

NO NO

Regulation
Is the activity relevantly connected or related to IC? YES VALID under
Commerce Clause
Considerations:
1. What is the size and power of the target?
2. Is Congress’s purpose frustrated by target’s activity?
a. When aggregated, would the target’s activity BUT
substantially affect IC?
b. If targets are difficult to distinguish from non-
targets (i.e., adulterated and unadulterated food Is Congressional act
products), does the commingling / intermingling forbidden by some
of both substantially affect IC? external constraint
c. Does the regulation seek to promote and on federal power?
regulate a prohibition on interstate commerce by (ie, state autonomy)
directly regulating production and manufacture?
(i.e., products of child labor forbidden to be
distributed in IC; thus, child labor laws enacted to
regulate production) 1. Is the law a law of general
d. Does the physical association of the target with applicability (a.k.a. applies to
IC (i.e. location directly next to an interstate hwy States and private parties alike)?
– McClung) substantially affect IC?
(a.k.a. “hooking”→ location hooks activity into IC)
YES
NO

2. Is there a coercive element

YES (a.k.a. compelling the States or
Regulation their agents to do something)?
INVALID

YES NO Regulation
VALID

BUT Note: Garcia purports to abandon Hodel’s test and give broad authority to (3.) Is what’s being
Congress; but it is unclear that “traditional matters of the state” has actually been regulated a matter of
NO
abandoned as a factor for determining whether an act of Congress unjustifiably exclusive or traditional
infringes on state autonomy (see language in Lopez) state concern?