Heart Of Atlanta Motel v. United States

379 U.S. 241 (1964)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The Heart of Atlanta Motel (P) had always limited its guests to white people. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was passed, making this practice illegal, since it discriminated on the basis of race. Congress passed this Act under the power given to it by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The motel is readily accessible to interstate highways 75 and 85 and state highways 23 and 41. Appellant solicits patronage from outside the State of Georgia through various national advertising media and maintains over 50 billboards and highway signs within the State. Approximately 75% of its registered guests are from out of State. The motel refused to rent rooms to Negroes. P contends that Congress exceeded its power to regulate commerce and that the Act violates the Fifth Amendment because P is deprived of the right to choose its customers and operate its business as it wishes, resulting in a taking of its liberty and property without due process of law and a taking of its property without just compensation. P also claims that Congress is subjecting it to involuntary servitude in contravention of the Thirteenth Amendment. The United States (D) contends that the unavailability to Negroes of adequate accommodations interferes significantly with interstate travel, and that Congress, under the Commerce Clause, has power to remove such obstructions and restraints; that the Fifth Amendment does not forbid reasonable regulation, and that consequential damage does not constitute a 'taking' within the meaning of that amendment; that the Thirteenth Amendment claim fails because it is entirely frivolous to say that an amendment directed to the abolition of human bondage and the removal of widespread disabilities associated with slavery places discrimination in public accommodations beyond the reach of both federal and state law. The District Court restrained P from 'refusing to accept Negroes as guests in the motel by reason of their race or color' and from making any distinction whatever upon the basis of race or color in the availability of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations offered or made available to the guests of the motel, or to the general public.