Maryland v. Wirtz

The decision in Maryland v. Wirtz also provoked sharp dissent from two Supreme Court justices, Douglas and Stewart. In his minority opinion, Justice Douglas raised the spectre of the federal government disrupting:

. . . the fiscal policy of the States . . . If constitutional principles of federalism raise no limits to the commerce power where regulation of state activities are concerned . . . could Congress compel the States to build superhighways crisscrossing their territory in order to accommodate interstate vehicles, to provide inns and eating places for interstate travelers, to quadruple their police forces in order to prevent commerce-crippling riots, etc.? Could the Congress virtually draw up each State's budget to avoid disruptive effect[s] . . . on commercial intercourse?