MIND Act of 2025

Congress possesses the authority to introduce, read, and refer bills concerning commerce to appropriate committees, as this process is incidental to its legislative powers under the Constitution. The subject of commerce among the several States is expressly delegated to the federal government, enabling regulation essential to national prosperity and union. In Federalist No. 11, I emphasized the necessity of a uniform commercial policy to secure commercial advantages and prevent destructive state rivalries, underscoring the propriety of federal legislation in this domain.

The MIND Act of 2025 is described in the realm of commerce and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Congress possesses authority 'To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes' under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, but this power is strictly confined to interstate commerce and must not extend to matters properly within the jurisdiction of the states or individuals. The Tenth Amendment reserves all powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people, ensuring that federal legislation does…

The proposed legislation falls within the policy area of commerce, which invokes the enumerated power of Congress to regulate commerce among the several states. This power is necessary to prevent the rivalries and obstructions that plagued the Confederation, as explained in my defense of the clause. However, its constitutionality depends upon whether the act is confined to genuine regulation of interstate commerce and does not encroach upon matters reserved to the states, such as local police powers or internal improvements not connected to commerce. Without the full text, it cannot be deemed …

The MIND Act of 2025 is presented as federal legislation in the policy area of Commerce and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Congress is vested with authority 'to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States' by Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. In Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), this Court held that such commerce power is comprehensive, embracing navigation and transactions crossing state lines. Furthermore, McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) established that Congress may employ all means plainly adapted to legitimate ends within its enumerated powe…