According to the provisions of the commerce clause, Congress is vested with the authority to regulate the entire country’s economy. The power implies that it also can control commerce between and among states. However, some critics argue that Congress exerts excessive control over commerce and limits individual states’ ability to regulate their economies. The authority to control commerce should remain in the hands of Congress. Contrary to critics’ argument, granting power to Congress does not limit the states’ power in any way. The commerce clause categorically states that Congress and the states all have their own mutually exclusive power zones. As such, the states also have some control of commerce in exclusive sectors. However, it is undeniable that Congress has more power.
By using its power, Congress manages to handle critical commercial functions that individual states could not otherwise handle. For instance, it leverages provisions of the commerce clause to address the challenges emanating from interstate barriers and negotiates trade agreements between states. With the power to control commerce between and among states, Congress can create a free trade zone among several states. Furthermore, it leverages its control of commerce to approve treaties that open foreign markets to American products. Admittedly, this is something that individual states cannot achieve.
In the past, state and local authorities have attempted to get involved in matters of foreign policy. However, courts have thwarted their efforts, and the disapproval is because of the perception that only the federal government acts as a sole agent of all American citizens. In essence, there are numerous benefits realized when control of interstate commerce is under Congress. The Supreme Court should not attempt to reel in Congress.