Business CASE ANALYSIS ASSIGNMENT
UNITED STATES v. LOPEZ
514 U.S. 549 (1995)
This assignment accounts for 10% of your final grade. Answer each of the following questions from Chief Justice Rehnquist’s majority opinion. We will discuss no other opinions in this assignment.
- The Constitution creates a government of ________________ powers. How does James Madison define that concept?
- The Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate interstate commerce, defined specifically as “commerce… among the several states”. Chief Justice Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden describes how the word “among” limits commerce: in which way?
- For nearly a century after Gibbons, the Court held that authority to regulate three types of activity was beyond the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause. What were they?
- What was the Court’s rationale for not allowing Congress to regulate the above activities? (see quotations from United States v. EC Knight and Carter v. Carter Coal Company.)
- In the Schecter case from 1935, the Court explained that Congress could treat activities that directly affected interstate commerce differently than those that indirectly affected interstate commerce.
- Two years later, in the case of NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (1937), the Court departed from the distinction between “direct” and “indirect” effects on interstate commerce. Which intrastate activities could now be regulated by Congress?
- Subsequently, the Court has identified three broad categories of activity that Congress may regulate under its commerce power. What are they?
- Which of the above categories applies to this case?
- Why does the disputed statute in this case not qualify for Congressional regulation under the above category? (Two reasons are given, both must be given to answer the question correctly; no partial credit will be given.)
- What does the Court state the result would be if it were to accept the government’s arguments?
