AP Government (Unit 1) - United States v. Lopez (Required Supreme Court Case)
Decision
- The Supreme Court sided with Lopez in a 5-4 decision - Reasoning from the majority opinion, "Under the theories that the Government presents in support of [this case], it is difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power, even in areas such as criminal law enforcement or education where States historcially have been sovereign. Thus, if we were to accept the Government's arguments, we are hard pressed to posit any activity by an individual that Congrses is without power to regulate." -- If Congress can use the commerce clause to regulate guns on school property, what can't Congress regulate with the commerce clause?
Arguments
- The lawyers for the United States argued that guns in school are related to interstate commerce because guns lead to gun violence, and if there is gun violence in schools, then people from other states might be less likely to travel through those towns which would negatively affect commerce in those places + if gun violence is rampant on school property, the learning environment detoriates, which leads to a less educated citizenry, which leads to those citizens not buying as much stuff (negative impact on commerce) - Lopez's lawyers argued that gun regulation on school property is a power specifically resreved for the states, and that the conenction between the commerce clause and gun violence is weak at best, and tyrannical federal ovverreach at worse + Congress had no busniess passing this law in the first place
Constitutional Principle
- This case is not about the 2nd amendment right to bare arms - Think of the enumerated powers of Congress and the reserved powers of the states - No where does it say in the enumerated powers of Congress that the federal Congress has authority to pass legislation about guns; gun legislation is a state issue - Congress passed a federal law prohibiting guns on school property base don the authority granted to Congress in the commerce clause of article 1, section 8 of the constitution, there, it says Congress has the authority to 'regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes." - This clause means that Congress has the authority to establish a free trade zone among the states, so Congress passed the gun-free school zones act based on its authority in the commerce clause
Why it matters
- This is a case about federalism: The balance of power between the federal and state governments - Cases in the past like McCulloch v. maryland that have tipped this balance of power toward the federal government, but in the United States v. Lopez, the decision is a clear example of a court ruling in favor of state power over federal power
The facts of the case
In San Antonio, Texas, a high school senior, Alfonso Lopez, decided to carry a 38 caliber pistol along with some bullets to school. The administration received an anonymous tip that he had done so, found the gun, then Lopez was arrested and sent to jail because under Texas law it was forbidden to carry a gun onto school property. The next day all the charges were dropped against Lopez, because as it turned out, in addition to the state laws in Texas prohibiting guns on school property, there was also a federal law called the gun free school zones act of 1990, which also prohibited guns on school property. The state charges were dropped because federal charges were brought against Lopez. Lopez was found guilty of breaking this federal law and sentenced to six months in prison.
