Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

United States v. Lopez

Supreme Court of the United States · 1995 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawCommerce Clauselimits on federal powerGun-Free School Zones ActCommerce Clauseenumerated powerssubstantial effectschannels of interstate commerce

Facts

Respondent, a 12th-grade student, arrived at Edison High School in San Antonio carrying a concealed .38-caliber handgun and five bullets. After school officials confronted him based on an anonymous tip, he admitted he had the weapon. State charges were dismissed after federal agents charged him under the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which made knowing possession of a firearm in a school zone a federal offense. The statute did not regulate commercial activity and did not require any connection between the possession and interstate commerce.

Issue

Whether Congress had authority under the Commerce Clause to enact 18 U.S.C. § 922(q), which criminalized knowing possession of a firearm in a school zone without requiring any connection to interstate commerce.

Rule

Under the Commerce Clause, Congress may regulate (1) the use of the channels of interstate commerce, (2) the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or persons or things in interstate commerce, and (3) activities that substantially affect interstate commerce. For this third category, the proper inquiry is whether the regulated activity substantially affects interstate commerce; a noncommercial criminal statute with no jurisdictional element tying the regulated conduct to interstate commerce cannot be sustained by piling inference upon inference to create a federal police power.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Congress enacts the Safe Rail Corridors Act, making it a federal crime to place scrap metal on railroad tracks used by trains traveling between Nevada and Utah. Mateo Ruiz is prosecuted in Reno after placing debris on a track segment wholly within Nevada.

Which is the strongest basis for upholding the statute under the Commerce Clause?

Explanation. The majority identified three categories of permissible Commerce Clause regulation, including regulation and protection of the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, even when the threat comes from intrastate activity. A railroad line used in interstate transportation falls within that category. The statute does not need to rest on broad cost-of-crime reasoning, which the majority rejected as effectively limitless.