AP Government and Politics Federalism Practice Test 2025 – Complete Exam Prep

Question: 1 / 400

What was the primary legal argument presented by the farmer in Wickard v. Filburn?

He argued that state laws supersede federal laws

He argued that growing wheat was not a commercial activity

He claimed the agricultural adjustment act was unconstitutional

He believed he was exempt because he did not intend to sell the wheat

The correct answer highlights the farmer’s belief that he should be exempt from federal regulations because he intended to use the wheat solely for personal consumption rather than for sale. This argument was rooted in his assertion that since the wheat he grew was not going to enter the market, it should not be subject to federal agricultural quotas established by the Agricultural Adjustment Act.

The significance of this case lies in the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Commerce Clause, which ultimately determined that even personal use of wheat could affect interstate commerce by influencing market demand and supply. This pretext allowed the federal government to regulate activities that, at first glance, appeared purely local or personal. By asserting that his non-commercial activity was exempt, Wickard sought to establish a boundary for federal authority, but the Court ruled against this view, reinforcing the broader interpretation of federal power. This ruling set a precedent for increased federal regulation of agricultural production and the economy in general.

Get further explanation with Examzify DeepDiveBeta
Next Question

Report this question

Subscribe

Get the latest from Examzify

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy