Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
In this particular case the court found that the GFSZA contained "no jurisdictional element which would ensure, through a case by case inquiry, that the firearm possession in question affects interstate commerce." ("United States v. Lopez") in effect, the court said that the federal government can only pass laws involving activities that substantially affects interstate commerce and the possession of a gun in a school did not rise to that level.
In his concurrence, Justice Kennedy, stated that "it was the insight of the Framers that freedom was enhanced by the creation of two governments, not one." ("United States v. Lopez") He argued that power divided between two separate institutions would control each other while simultaneously controlling themselves. This, it was thought, would lesson the chance that one institution would become tyrannical because the concept of "federalism," "secures to citizens the liberties that derive from the diffusion of sovereign power." ("United States v. Lopez") Lopez used this argument in his challenge and claimed that Congress lacked the power under the system of federalism to enact such a law. This claim that was backed up by the Supreme Court's decision which held that Congress had not presented findings that guns in schools affected interstate commerce and had then exceeded its legislative power in enacting the law.
To those who support Lopez, this case involved...
But more importantly it was an extension of federal power into a domain that had been traditionally left to the states; an upsetting of the delicate balance of federalism. When the Supreme Court agreed with Lopez, it re-established the balance that had existed prior to the passage of the GFSZA, and restricted the power of the federal government. The commerce clause is somewhat vague as to the specifics of what exactly constitutes "commerce," and therefore is open to interpretations that could allow the federal government to interfere in just about any aspect of personal life. This is something the framers of the Constitution wanted to avoid and thus split power between the federal government and the states. With the decision in United States v. Lopez, an attempt to gain further power by the federal government was avoided and balance restored to the division of power.
References
"Federalism." Legal Information Institute Cornell University Law School.
Retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/federalism
United States v. Lopez: A Case Brief Summary. Lawnix.com. Retrieved from http://www.lawnix.com/cases/united-states-lopez.html
United States v. Lopez (93-1260), 514 U.S. 549 (1995). Retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1260.ZO.html
Filburn harvested nearly 12 acres of wheat above his allotment. He claimed that he wanted the wheat for use on his farm, including feed for his poultry and livestock. Fiburn was penalized. He argued that the excess wheat was unrelated to commerce since he grew it for his own use. The question in the matter was: Is the amendment subjecting Filburn to acreage restrictions in violation of the Constitution
The plaintiffs were disabled Tennesseans who could not access the upper floors in state courthouses. They sued in Federal Court, arguing that since Tennessee was disallowing them public services for the reason that their disabilities, it was infringing Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Tennessee argued that the Eleventh Amendment banned the suit, and filed a motion to dismiss the case. It relied chiefly on Board
status of federalism within the U.S. It is the thesis of the paper that the President, the Courts and Congress have assumed influential and significant roles in the shaping of federalism in recent decades. Initially, a conceptualization of federalism will be offered as established by the founding fathers. Current literature will then be used to identify factors associated with and the role assumed by the presidency, the Courts and
Stress: Regulation of Wetlands in the United States Regulation of Wetlands in the United States Defining Wetlands and their Value A wetland refers to a place where water covers the soil. A wetland is a saturated land that comprises of swamps or marshes. Lewis defines a wetland as, "an ecosystem that depends on constant or recurrent, shallow inundation or saturation at or near the surface of the substrate" (p.3). He further ascertains that
Partisan Politics At the time the U.S. Constitution was ratified, the new America of the 19th century saw its indigenes with varied political opinions. Those in favor of a powerful central government and therefore, a restraint of the powers the states possessed were part of the Federalist Party; those with the belief that interpretation should be given to the Constitution in order to reduce the powers the national government wields, which
Authoritarian Regimes Authoritarianism has been a historically produced phenomenon in reaction to state crises of political order. Its primary feature has actually been elitist dictatorship, with the periodic cult of character. It is a feedback to democratic failure, social polarization, financial stagnation, and worldwide weakness, which typically becomes the reason for its stamina. An additional reason for its stamina is that it normally works out sovereign power with single-party guideline, and