Who is the plaintiff in US v Lopez?

Asked by: Dino Mitchell  |  Last update: February 19, 2022
Score: 5/5 (27 votes)

Case Details

Who dissented in US v Lopez?

In his dissent, Associate Justice Stephen Breyer argued that Congress could regulate handgun possession under the Commerce Clause because gun violence could have a significant effect on interstate commerce by impairing educational environments.

Who was involved in the US v Lopez case?

A high school senior in San Antonio, Texas was charged with violating the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. Alfonso Lopez, Jr. was caught inside the school while carrying a .
  • William Hubbs Rehnquist (Author)
  • Sandra Day O'Connor.
  • Antonin Scalia.
  • Anthony M. Kennedy.
  • Clarence Thomas.

Which party won in the United States v Lopez case?

Lopez, legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on April 26, 1995, ruled (5–4) that the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 was unconstitutional because the U.S. Congress, in enacting the legislation, had exceeded its authority under the commerce clause of the Constitution.

Who decided US v Lopez?

The outcome: The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the Gun-Free School Zones Act overstepped the boundaries of the federal power to regulate interstate commerce and was unconstitutional. In brief: On March 10, 1992, 12th-grade student Alfonso Lopez brought a concealed .

The United States v. Lopez, EXPLAINED [AP Gov Required Supreme Court Cases]

28 related questions found

What did Lopez argue in US v Lopez?

Lopez challenged his conviction, arguing that the Gun Free School Zones Act was an unconstitutional exercise of Congress's power. ... The government also argued that the disruptions to the learning environment created by guns in schools result in a less educated citizenry, negatively affecting commerce.

Who was the Chief Justice in US v Lopez?

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and released in 1995, ruled that the Gun-Free School Zones Act was unconstitutional and overturned Lopez's conviction.

Who won South Dakota v Dole?

Decision. The Supreme Court held 7–2 that the statute represented a valid use of Congressional authority under the Spending Clause and that the statute did not infringe upon the rights of the states.

How did United States vs Lopez change the balance of power?

Lopez affected the balance of power between the federal and state governments. The Court's decision in Lopez struck down a federal law creating gun-free school zones, which limited the power of the federal government in relation to the states.

Why is US v Lopez a landmark case?

US v. Lopez was a landmark case as ruled that the federal government had exceeded its authority under the commerce clause.

Why was United States v Lopez important quizlet?

Lopez (1995) 12th grade high school student carried a weapon into his school. 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. ...

Where did US v Lopez take place?

Alfonzo Lopez, a 12th grade high school student, carried a concealed weapon into his San Antonio, Texas high school. He was charged under Texas law with firearm possession on school premises.

What two laws was Lopez charged with violating and what happened to those charges quizlet?

He was charged under Texas law with firearm possession on school premises. The next day, the state charges were dismissed after federal agents charged Lopez with violating a federal criminal statute, the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990.

Who won in Engel v Vitale?

In a 6–1 decision, the Supreme Court held that reciting government-written prayers in public schools was unconstitutional, violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Who won the Baker v Carr case?

On March 26, 1962, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 6-2 in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that apportionment cases are justiciable (i.e., that federal courts have the right to intervene in such cases).

What happened to Lopez after U.S. v Lopez?

After admitting to having the gun, Lopez was arrested and charged with violating the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act, which makes it a crime “for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm [in] a school zone.” After being indicted by a grand jury, Lopez was found guilty by a trial court and sentenced to six months ...

Which of these is the best explanation of the US v Lopez decision's effects?

Which of these is the best explanation of the US v. Lopez decision's effects? The law is unconstitutional because it did not significantly affect interstate commerce.

What caused South Dakota v Dole?

Introduction. South Dakota v Dole (1987) is a case that came about after a teenager was killed by a drunk driver. This caused Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey to push for legislation establishing a national drinking age of twenty-one. ... The legislation was in the pursuit of the “general welfare”.

What was the outcome of the South Dakota v Dole case?

7–2 decision

In a 7-to-2 decision, the Court held that Congress, acting indirectly to encourage uniformity in states' drinking ages, was within constitutional bounds. The Court found that the legislation was in pursuit of "the general welfare," and that the means chosen to do so were reasonable.

What was the decision in the Butler case?

Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936), is a U.S. Supreme Court case that held that the U.S. Congress has not only the power to lay taxes to the level necessary to carry out its other powers enumerated in Article I of the U.S. Constitution but also a broad authority to tax and spend for the "general welfare" of the United States.

Why did the plaintiff William Marbury Sue James Madison who was the Secretary of state?

The U.S. Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review—the power of the federal courts to declare legislative and executive acts unconstitutional. ... Marbury sued the new secretary of state, James Madison, in order to obtain his commission.

Who won Mcculloch v Maryland?

In a unanimous decision, the Court held that Congress had the power to incorporate the bank and that Maryland could not tax instruments of the national government employed in the execution of constitutional powers. Pursuant to the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art.

What cases is similar to US v Lopez?

United States v. Lopez
  • Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942).
  • Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964).
  • Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964).
  • Maryland v. Wirtz, 392 U.S. 183 (1968).
  • League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 183 (1968).
  • Garcia v. ...
  • Gregory v.

What are the Lopez factors?

In Lopez, the Court stated that Congress has the power to “regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in interstate commerce, even though the threat may come only from intrastate activities.” Therefore, the power includes the power to regulate the instrumentalities or means ...

What is the Lopez test?

In United States v. Lopez, the Supreme Court affirmed that Congress may regulate activity that substantially affects interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause. ... This two-part test in turn suggests that Congress may not regulate absent activity under this test.