United States v. Lopez

The United States v. Lopez case begins in 1930 with the respondent alfonzo lopez, a high school senior who on march 10th, 19192 carried a concealed hand weapon into his high school in San Antonio, Texas. Lopez was said that additional to the gun being loaded he carried five backups in his pockets. After confrontation by the police he later admitted to his actions.As a result of his actions he was cahrged with violating firearms possesion on school premisses under the Texas federal law known as the

United States Vs. Lopez (1995) HIS 303 March 28, 2010 United States Vs. Lopez (1995) Before I can appropriately discuss the opinion given by the US Supreme Court Justices; I feel that at first I must explain the background of what happened and the question that was brought before the justices of the US Supreme Court and the facts of the case. During this paper I will try to give some background information as well as the various opinions related to this issue. I will attempt to analyze

other. In McColloch v. Maryland, for example, a state tax on the U.S. Bank would cause negative externalities against all citizens of other states. This is not in the best interest of the majority, or even Maryland in the long haul, to tax the US Bank. The key is to reach the best outcome in terms of majority. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Nonetheless, there are definite benefits under the protection of the Tenth Amendment. The Tenth Amendment allows states of different backgrounds

eighteen in the United States. (Lopez, 2015) Additionally, the growing population of Latina/o children and their fight for education, a New Civil Rights Movement has emerged as undocumented students fight for access and recognition in higher education. Undocumented immigrants’ access to higher education can be a highly politicized and controversial issue, especially depending on the state nation’s economy and the political atmosphere in the country at the time. (Gildersleeve, 2010) Plyer v. Doe is the

right to regulate commerce among the U.S. and foreign nations and some states. The commerce clause has led to great controversy for many years. The commerce clause gives congress authority to legislate in many areas or address a broad range of issues. The clause however does limit the congress to only the regulation of interstate commerce. The interstate commerce allows business to be conducted across the state lines. The states are left with the rights to regulate local and interstate commerce.

the United States in 1787 to the Supreme Court cases of the 21st century, the interpretation of the Commerce Clause has been a great source of controversy in the Supreme Court. Simply put, the Commerce Clause grants power to Congress to “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes” . When interpreted leniently, the Commerce Clause can give vast powers to Congress to regulate interstate commerce and any action leading up to it. In Wickard v Filburn

1. Two cases that help represent how congress dealt with voting rights are Breedlove v. Suttles (1937) and Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966). The former case upheld a Georgia Statute that allowed the state to implement a voting tax on all eligible male voters between the ages of 22-59 for $1.00 per year. They ruled that voting is a privilege consequential of state rights not federal, which can enact certain conditions that may be deemed applicable. A law requiring payment of poll taxes

- Chief Justice HUMPHREYS delivered the opinion of the Court. Olympus is one of at least a dozen States that currently does not have a statewide smoking ban in food serving establishments. The question presented in this case is whether the power vested in Congress by Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution “to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying” …has the power under the Constitution to enact the Clean Air-Clean Eating Act (CACEA) and to regulate the restaurant industry

this, Christy Brzonkala a freshman at Virginia Tech was assaulted and raped by Antonio Morrison and James Crawford. An investigation was followed up in which Morrison had admitted having sexual contact with her, despite her telling him “no” twice. A state grand jury, not

I. Can the State Legislature of Connecticut pass a law banning Abrapharm? No; the State Legislature of Connecticut cannot pass a law banning Abrapharm. Abrapharm manufactures midazolam hydrochloride, which is regulated by the federal government under the Controlled Substance Act. This act places the regulation of the drug under the authority of the DEA not the State. The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution makes the federal act preempt the CT state law. Further, Abrapharm is the sole manufacturer