Commercial law tends to revolve around a central question: how much regulation of business is too much regulation? Further, who is responsible for this regulation-states, the federal government, or business itself? With this guiding question in mind, let us track the history of commercial law in America, beginning with the 1877 case of Munn v. Illinois and progressing to the 2012 “Obamacare” case, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. One of the earliest landmark cases in American commercial law was Munn v. Illinois. The Munn case involved Illinois’ right to regulate grain warehouses, including inspections and the handling of grain. Munn asserted that his 14th Amendment due process right to property was being violated by Illinois’ regulation of the rates for his grain elevator. The Court held that the state can regulate a private business in the public’s interest, as long as that company can be seen as operating as a public utility. This ruling was also applied to states regulating railroads within their borders, which were seen as a public utility. This was an important case in the history of commercial law because it established the states’ right to regulate private business in the narrow cases of public utilities. This was an early, pro-government ruling at the end of the Reconstruction Era and the beginning of the United States’ rise to economic prominence in the world stage. Lochner v. New York, decided in 1905, was an important first case in a set of pro-business decisions during the early 20th century, a period which came to be known as the Lochner Era. The Lochner decision found that a New York law that limited the number of hours a baker could work was a violation of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. Further, such regulation of labor was an overreach of the state’s police powers. The freedom of contract was paramount in this era and, according to the Supreme Court, could only be infringed under extremely necessary circumstances. This case established a period of Court history that was pro-business and anti-labor. Coppage v. Kansas, coming ten years after the Lochner decision, further limited states’ abilities to regulate labor relations. In Coppage, the Court ruled that a Kansas law prohibiting companies from m