Consider the U$.$S$.$ Supreme Court's holdings $($decisiozs$)$ in Gibbons v$.$ Ogden $(1824)$ and Wickard v$.$ Filburn $(1942).$ With respect to each case's impact upon Congress's power to regulate commerce, which of the following statements is correct?

Gibbons V$.$ Ogden expanded Corigress's power to regulate commerce and Wickard v$.$ Filburn expanded it even more.

Gibbons V$.$ Ogden expanded Congress's power to regulate commerce, but Wickard. Filburn restricted it somewhat.

Gibbons v$.$ Ogden expanded Congress's power to regulate commerce, but Wickard v$.$ Filbum returned it to what it was before Gibbons v$.$ Ogden

Wickard v$.$ Filburn had the same effect upon Congress's power to regulate commerce as Gibbons v$.$ Ogden in that Wickard v$.$ Filburn merely articulated the holding $($decision$)$ in Gibbons v$.$ Ogden and applied it to a different factual circumstance.

Neither Gibbons v$.$ Ogden nor Wickard v$.$ Filburn had any measurable impact upon Congress's power to regulate commerce beyond the power to regulate commerce originally granted to Congress by the plain language of the Commerce Clause in the U$.$S$.$ Constitution.

Wickard V$.$ Filburn had the same effect upon Congress's power to regulate commerce as Gibbons V$.$

Ogden in that Wickard v$.$ Filburn cited Gibbons v$.$ Ogden as precedent, meaning Wickard v$.$ Filburn was bound to follow Gibbons v$.$ Ogden as the "landmark case" with respect to the Commerce Clause.