United States V. Lopez 1995?
Q. Um can someone tell me the majority and the minority opinion on this supreme court case plz. 10 points thanks!
Asked by Needs help and gives help. - Wed Apr 21 21:09:00 2010 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The majority opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Rehnquist, was that Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce did not extend to regulating public schools (specifically the carrying of hand guns in public schools). The conclusion read: "To uphold the Government's contentions here, we have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States. Admittedly, some of our prior cases have taken long steps down that road, giving great deference to congressional action. The broad language in these opinions has suggested the possibility of additional expansion, but we decline here to proceed any further. To do… [cont.]
Answered by Yours Truly - Wed Apr 21 21:27:14 2010
Q. Um can someone tell me the majority and the minority opinion on this supreme court case plz. 10 points thanks!
Asked by Needs help and gives help. - Wed Apr 21 21:09:00 2010 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The majority opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Rehnquist, was that Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce did not extend to regulating public schools (specifically the carrying of hand guns in public schools). The conclusion read: "To uphold the Government's contentions here, we have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States. Admittedly, some of our prior cases have taken long steps down that road, giving great deference to congressional action. The broad language in these opinions has suggested the possibility of additional expansion, but we decline here to proceed any further. To do… [cont.]
Answered by Yours Truly - Wed Apr 21 21:27:14 2010
Who's the plaintiff for U.S. v. Lopez?
Q. United States v. Lopez? Do you happen to know if its about the Congress being in the way and how they shouldnt be "here" or about Lopez having a gun?
Asked by hahaha - Thu Dec 10 21:33:29 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
Q. United States v. Lopez? Do you happen to know if its about the Congress being in the way and how they shouldnt be "here" or about Lopez having a gun?
Asked by hahaha - Thu Dec 10 21:33:29 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
2 court cases I need help with?
Q. Why might pro-gun advocates support the United States v. Lopez (1994) decision? What does the Court really say about government's power to ban gun possession? & Why was the Court's decision in Dickerson v. United States (2000) such a surprise? On what constitutional principle did Chief Justice Rehnquist base his decision? Thanks I need help with these alot lol. They will be for a grade
Asked by Anonymous A - Sun Mar 22 20:09:57 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Dickerson v US(surprise due to Miranda Rights not given but Court find it not necessary due to statement made voluntarily) In the wake of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, in which the Court held that certain warnings must be given before a suspect s statement made during custodial interrogation could be admitted in evidence, id., at 479, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. 3501 which in essence makes the admissibility of such statements turn solely on whether they were made voluntarily. Petitioner, under indictment for bank robbery and related federal crimes, moved to suppress a statement he had made to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, on the ground he had not received Miranda warnings before being interrogated. The District Court granted… [cont.]
Answered by Steven C - Sun Mar 22 21:12:27 2009
Q. Why might pro-gun advocates support the United States v. Lopez (1994) decision? What does the Court really say about government's power to ban gun possession? & Why was the Court's decision in Dickerson v. United States (2000) such a surprise? On what constitutional principle did Chief Justice Rehnquist base his decision? Thanks I need help with these alot lol. They will be for a grade
Asked by Anonymous A - Sun Mar 22 20:09:57 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Dickerson v US(surprise due to Miranda Rights not given but Court find it not necessary due to statement made voluntarily) In the wake of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, in which the Court held that certain warnings must be given before a suspect s statement made during custodial interrogation could be admitted in evidence, id., at 479, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. 3501 which in essence makes the admissibility of such statements turn solely on whether they were made voluntarily. Petitioner, under indictment for bank robbery and related federal crimes, moved to suppress a statement he had made to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, on the ground he had not received Miranda warnings before being interrogated. The District Court granted… [cont.]
Answered by Steven C - Sun Mar 22 21:12:27 2009
Does Anyone Know??!!??!?!?!?
Q. Any Good Landmark Cases Websites... These are some of the cases: 1.Garcia V. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit 2.United States v. Lopez 3.Wesberry V. Sanders 4.Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas 5.Texas V. Johnson 6.Mapp V. Ohio 7.Plessy V. Ferguson 8.Regents Of the University Of California v. Bakke 9.Charles River Bridge v. warren Bridge 10.Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company V. Sawyer Plz can u help me out...
Asked by Danie - Fri Nov 30 09:48:31 2007 - - 8 Answers - 0 Comments
A. this is a wonderful website taht you will find very useful!
Answered by Chantal B - Fri Nov 30 10:03:22 2007
Q. Any Good Landmark Cases Websites... These are some of the cases: 1.Garcia V. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit 2.United States v. Lopez 3.Wesberry V. Sanders 4.Brown V. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas 5.Texas V. Johnson 6.Mapp V. Ohio 7.Plessy V. Ferguson 8.Regents Of the University Of California v. Bakke 9.Charles River Bridge v. warren Bridge 10.Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company V. Sawyer Plz can u help me out...
Asked by Danie - Fri Nov 30 09:48:31 2007 - - 8 Answers - 0 Comments
A. this is a wonderful website taht you will find very useful!
Answered by Chantal B - Fri Nov 30 10:03:22 2007
I need a CONSTITUTIONAL LAW scholar to answer this!!!?
Q. I'm depending on my constitutional law exam grade to turn it around for me and to prevent myself from getting expelled. Please read this exam question and my response and tell me the chances I have of getting a B+. If I just got a B-/C+ type grade, I'm getting dismissed, most likely. I need a GOOD grade. Here was the exam question: President Obama, in response to the H1N1 virus, closes off the borders to travel and commerce. He acts pursuant to an act of Congress authorizing him to take all appropriate measures to keep the country safe. Meanwhile, he gives the secretary of commerce power to force all states to comply with new federal laws concerning the processing of pork. All state laws concerning the processing of pork are… [cont.]
Asked by Dillon H - Sun May 31 22:26:36 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. There might be hope for this country yet...
Answered by Sovereignty is Popular - Sun May 31 22:36:35 2009
Q. I'm depending on my constitutional law exam grade to turn it around for me and to prevent myself from getting expelled. Please read this exam question and my response and tell me the chances I have of getting a B+. If I just got a B-/C+ type grade, I'm getting dismissed, most likely. I need a GOOD grade. Here was the exam question: President Obama, in response to the H1N1 virus, closes off the borders to travel and commerce. He acts pursuant to an act of Congress authorizing him to take all appropriate measures to keep the country safe. Meanwhile, he gives the secretary of commerce power to force all states to comply with new federal laws concerning the processing of pork. All state laws concerning the processing of pork are… [cont.]
Asked by Dillon H - Sun May 31 22:26:36 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. There might be hope for this country yet...
Answered by Sovereignty is Popular - Sun May 31 22:36:35 2009
Gonzales v. Raich (2005)??
Q. Gonzales v. Raich (2005), Justices Scalia and Kennedy departed from their previous positions as parts of the Lopez and Morrison majorities to uphold a federal law regarding marijuana. The court found the federal law valid, although the marijuana in question had been grown and consumed within a single state, and had never entered interstate commerce. Is this not a violation of the commerce clause?? If the marijuana never crossed state lines then how can congress control it under the commerce clause. According to the Tenth Amendment, the federal government of the United States has the power to regulate only matters specifically delegated to it by the Constitution. Other powers are reserved to the States, or to the people. Justice Clarence… [cont.]
Asked by mlada24 - Sat Mar 24 19:19:46 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The Court upheld the constitutionality of the Fed law because of the case's analogy to Wickard v. Filburn, in which regulation of farming homegrown wheat for use at home, seemingly a solely private & local activity, was still constitutional because the purpose of the Fed law in place was to limit wheat production & set quotas to stabilize the market, and even though an individual growing something for personal use was a small effect, the Court looked to the cumulative effect on the market (person growing it is using it at home instead of buying wheat or selling the surplus across state lines, so still affects interstate commerce). So, if they allowed the home-grown wheat in that case, it would have threatened Congress ability to regulate… [cont.]
Answered by zucca - Sat Mar 24 20:09:21 2007
Q. Gonzales v. Raich (2005), Justices Scalia and Kennedy departed from their previous positions as parts of the Lopez and Morrison majorities to uphold a federal law regarding marijuana. The court found the federal law valid, although the marijuana in question had been grown and consumed within a single state, and had never entered interstate commerce. Is this not a violation of the commerce clause?? If the marijuana never crossed state lines then how can congress control it under the commerce clause. According to the Tenth Amendment, the federal government of the United States has the power to regulate only matters specifically delegated to it by the Constitution. Other powers are reserved to the States, or to the people. Justice Clarence… [cont.]
Asked by mlada24 - Sat Mar 24 19:19:46 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The Court upheld the constitutionality of the Fed law because of the case's analogy to Wickard v. Filburn, in which regulation of farming homegrown wheat for use at home, seemingly a solely private & local activity, was still constitutional because the purpose of the Fed law in place was to limit wheat production & set quotas to stabilize the market, and even though an individual growing something for personal use was a small effect, the Court looked to the cumulative effect on the market (person growing it is using it at home instead of buying wheat or selling the surplus across state lines, so still affects interstate commerce). So, if they allowed the home-grown wheat in that case, it would have threatened Congress ability to regulate… [cont.]
Answered by zucca - Sat Mar 24 20:09:21 2007
do you like latin/hispanics?
Q. I'm planing to be an actress but i'm from mexican/guatemalan family. I was born in Los Angeles CA United States. I speak english. & well I'm planning to act for like Disney Channel so i could be a great role model.& i would like to act for Universal too. Well what doyou guys think? do you know any actor/actress that works in American T.V. Like george lopez?
Asked by unknown - Mon Jan 19 23:48:03 2009 - - 10 Answers - 0 Comments
A. yeah, i have LOTs of hispanic friends I wish you well on acheiving your dreams, your day will come... btw, Selena is my girl!
Answered by pe ce - Mon Jan 19 23:56:37 2009
Q. I'm planing to be an actress but i'm from mexican/guatemalan family. I was born in Los Angeles CA United States. I speak english. & well I'm planning to act for like Disney Channel so i could be a great role model.& i would like to act for Universal too. Well what doyou guys think? do you know any actor/actress that works in American T.V. Like george lopez?
Asked by unknown - Mon Jan 19 23:48:03 2009 - - 10 Answers - 0 Comments
A. yeah, i have LOTs of hispanic friends I wish you well on acheiving your dreams, your day will come... btw, Selena is my girl!
Answered by pe ce - Mon Jan 19 23:56:37 2009
From Yahoo Answer Search: 'United States v. Lopez'
Sat Jul 31 23:49:20 2010 [ refresh local cache ]
[Hide]▼
marianist.com
241px x 331px | 12.70kB
[source page]
Bros Nico Castilla Lopez left and Fermin Garcia Garcia both from the District of Mexico enjoying the beach at Veracruz
law.upenn.edu
Kristin Michelle Ekert
hu, 25 Mar 2010 14:27:39 GM
Morrison or . United States v. . . Lopez. . Nor can the mandate be based on the Taxing and Spending Clause because Congress cannot use a tax to regulate conduct that is otherwise indisputably beyond its regulatory power. ...
[Hide]▲
