Amendment Of Us V Lopez In Pima
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
It upheld the principle that states have control of local issues, like gun possession on school grounds. The case was the first in a long time that stated the federal government had overstepped its bounds and that Congress had given itself too much power under the commerce clause.
5–4 decision The possession of a gun in a local school zone is not an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. The law is a criminal statute that has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic activity.
Lopez argues that section 922(q) exceeds Congress' delegated powers and violates the Tenth Amendment. The government counters that section 922(q) is a permissible exercise of Congress' power under the Commerce Clause.
In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had exceeded its constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause when it passed a law prohibiting gun possession in local school zones.
4.4 Commerce Clause and Tenth Amendment.
In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Supreme Court ruled that Congress had exceeded its constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause when it passed a law prohibiting gun possession in local school zones.
5–4 decision Yes. The possession of a gun in a local school zone is not an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. The law is a criminal statute that has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic activity.
United States v. Lopez (93-1260), 514 U.S. 549 (1995).
