This case involved the application of the Civil Rights Act of l964 to a small family-run restaurant, Ollie's Barbecue. Ollie's refused to serve blacks on the premises. As a result this action was brought. Since the Civil Rights Act applied only if a business was involved in interstate commerce, the Court had to decide if a small family-owned business was so involved. The record showed that part of the supplies bought by the restaurant was transported in interstate commerce, even though the restaurant operated solely within a state. The court held that there was a sufficient connection with interstate commerce to apply the Civil Rights Act.
1. This case deals with the validity of the Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Why is the Court discussing the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution?
2. Does a small, family-owned business really have a substantial impact on interstate commerce? Why or why not?
3. Why is the result in this case different from the result in United States v. Lopez (Application 2.1)?