Flowers Foods, Inc. v. Brock · ¶21

To be sure, and as Flowers highlights, we have held that the phrase “engaged in” interstate commerce in § 1 denotes a “direct,” “necessary,” and “activ[e]” role in moving goods across borders. Saxon, 596 U. S., at 458 (internal quotation marks omitted). We reaffrm as much today. But we do not see how any of that dictates the rule Flowers seeks. As the hypothetical above and cases like The Daniel Ball illustrate, individuals can sometimes be direct, necessary, and active participants in moving goods “from . . . points in one state” to “points in another state” without crossing state lines or interacting with vehicles that do. Black's 1001.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.