What legal principle did the Wickard v. Filburn decision reinforce regarding Congress's power?

The decision in Wickard v. Filburn reinforced the principle that Congress has the authority to regulate activities that cumulatively affect commerce. In this landmark case, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of a farmer, Roscoe Filburn, who grew more wheat than the federal government allowed for personal consumption on his own farm. The Court ruled that even though Filburn's actions were local and did not enter into interstate commerce, they could still have a substantial effect on the overall market for wheat.

This ruling supported the idea that Congress's regulatory powers extend beyond direct involvement in interstate commerce to include local activities if those activities, when taken together with similar actions, have a significant economic impact on interstate commerce. This interpretation of the Commerce Clause has far-reaching implications, allowing for broader federal regulatory authority over various economic activities, providing a robust framework for federal involvement in economic regulation.

The other options suggest limitations on Congress's powers or focus on aspects that do not characterize the ruling. Therefore, the focus on cumulative effects underlines the expansive interpretation of Congress's regulatory authority as established by the Court in this case.