The power of the congress to regulate commercial activity regarding firearms

Fifty years after the passage of the Freedom of Information Act, the letter of the law lives on but its spirit has been crushed. While it's definitely preferable to having no opportunity to demand government agencies hand over requested documents, it's not the significant improvement it was promised to be. As was noted here four years ago, the government has pretty much adopted a presumption of opacity that necessitates the filing of lawsuits. This contradicts the law's intentions, as well as proclamations made by President Obama, who declared his administration the "most transparent.

The power of the congress to regulate commercial activity regarding firearms

Get the latest news and analysis in the stock market today, including national and world stock market news, business news, financial news and more. Business Law Chapter 6. STUDY. PLAY. What creates the Congress, the presidency, vice presidency, and the supreme court? - basically gives state government the power to regulate business activities. True or false: the state powers are limitless. Business Law Chapter 7. terms. Business Law, Chapter 1. 46 terms. Chapter 4: . The Public Inspection page on ashio-midori.com offers a preview of documents scheduled to appear in the next day's Federal Register issue. The Public Inspection page may also include documents scheduled for later issues, at the request of the issuing agency.

Sebelius Summary The Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution provides that the Congress shall have the power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. The plain meaning of this language might indicate a limited power to regulate commercial trade between persons in one state and persons outside of that state.

However, the Commerce Clause has never been construed quite so narrowly. Rather, the clause, along with the economy of the United States, has grown and become more complex. In addition, when Congress began to address national social problems, the Commerce Clause was often cited as the constitutional basis for such legislation.

As a result, the Commerce Clause has become the constitutional basis for a significant portion of the laws passed by Congress over the last 50 years, and it currently represents one of the broadest bases for the exercise of congressional powers.

An examination of the United States Code shows that more than statutory provisions, covering a range of issues, are explicitly based on regulation of either "interstate" or "foreign" commerce. Over the last two decades, however, the Supreme Court in United States v.

Lopez and United States v. The effect of these cases, however, has so far been relatively modest in scope.

The power of the congress to regulate commercial activity regarding firearms

For instance, a later case, Gonzales v. Raich, confirmed the authority of Congress to regulate medical marijuana, suggesting that the effect of the prior cases will be limited.

Yet, in the case of National Federation of Business v. Sebelius, considering a challenge to an individual mandate to buy health insurance, the Court found that the Commerce Clause did not provide authority for such mandate. The Power to Regulate Commerce: An examination of the United States Code shows that more than statutory provisions explicitly refer to either "interstate" or "foreign" commerce, covering a significant number of issues.

These issues include agriculture, 1 banking, 2 antitrust, 3 securities, 4 business regulation, 5 energy regulation, 6 hazardous substances, 7 consumer credit, 8 sports regulation, 9 the Internet, 10 endangered species, 11 civil rights, 12 child support, 13 child pornography, 14 abortion, 15 criminal law, 16 controlled substances, 17 food, 18 firearms control, 19 terrorism, 20 obscenity, 21 gambling devices, 22 labor, 23 industrial safety, 24 pensions, 25 environmental law, 26 fish and wildlife, 27 medical products, 28 water pollution, 29 atomic energy, 30 shipping, 31 motor vehicle safety, 32 airplanes, 33 and tort litigation.

A Supreme Court case, Gonzales v. Raich, 36 seems to confirm that the effect of these previous cases will be limited. This is because state restrictions on trade between states were already prohibited under the Articles of Confederation, and the states generally complied with these restrictions.

Case Law Development In Gibbons v. Ogden, the Supreme Court, in an opinion by Chief Justice Marshall, considered a challenge to a monopoly on the operation of steam-propelled vessels in New York waters. This monopoly was challenged by Gibbons, who transported passengers from New Jersey to New York under an act of Congress.

The Chief Justice, in striking down the monopoly, wrote that "the power over commerce This would restrict a general term, applicable to many objects, to one of its significations.

Commerce, undoubtedly, is traffic, but it is something more—it is intercourse," which the Court found easily included the issue of navigation.

Marshall did qualify the word "intercourse" with the word "commercial," thus retaining the element of monetary transactions. The Court did not soon revisit this expansive view of the Commerce Clause.

Consequently, the Court struck down a series of federal statutes which attempted to extend commerce regulation to activities such as "production," "manufacturing" 53 or "mining. In the NLRB case, the Court upheld the National Labor Relations Act, finding that by controlling industrial labor strife, Congress was preventing burdens from being placed on interstate commerce.

By allowing Congress to regulate activities which were in the "stream" of commerce, the Court also set the stage for the regulation of a variety of other activities which "affect" commerce. Subsequent Court decisions found that Congress had considerable discretion in regulating activities which "affect" interstate commerce, as long as the legislation was "reasonably" related to achieving its goals of regulating interstate commerce.

Lopez, 63 however, the Supreme Court brought into question the extent to which Congress can rely on the Commerce Clause as a basis for federal jurisdiction. Under the Gun-Free School Zones Act ofCongress made it a federal offense for "any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

The Lopez case was significant in that it was the first time since that the Supreme Court struck down a federal statute purely based on a finding that Congress had exceeded it powers under the Commerce Clause. The Court also recognized that while some intrastate activities may by themselves have a trivial effect on commerce, regulation of these activities may be constitutional if their regulation is an essential part of a larger economic regulatory scheme.

Thus, the Court even approved what has been perceived as one of its most expansive rulings, Wickard v. Filburn, which allowed the regulation of the production of wheat for home consumption. It held that it was not a regulation of channels of commerce, nor did it protect an instrumentality of commerce.

Finally, its effect on interstate commerce was found to be too removed to be "substantial. Morrison, 75 discussed infra, both of these decisions dealt primarily with the issue of "substantial impact" on commerce. However, as noted, the Court has identified two other categories of power that Congress has under the Commerce Clause—regulation of channels of commerce and regulation of instrumentalities of commerce—that have been interpreted almost as broadly.Congressional Authority to Regulate Firearms: A Legal Overview Congressional Research Service 1 Overview of Commerce Clause The U.S.

Constitution specifies the enumerated powers of the federal government.1 These powers, however, have been interpreted broadly so as to create a large potential overlap with state authority.

[+]Associate Professor of Law, Cornell Law School. For their many helpful comments, I would like to thank Gregory Alexander, Akhil Amar, Hendrik Hartog, James Henderson, Don Kates, Isaac Kramnick, Sanford Levinson, David Lyons, Frank Michelman, Steven Shiffrin, and Susan Williams.

This seems sort of cyclical.

Commerce Clause | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information Institute

I was living in Oakland and Berkeley when the Bay Area meetups got started, and for a while — until late in or thereabouts, I think — there was a pretty good chance that you’d run into some of the community’s leading lights if you went to the Berkeley meetup.

The Government argues that Congress has accumulated institutional expertise regarding the regulation of firearms through previous enactments. pursuant to its Commerce Clause power, regulate activities that adversely affect the learning environment, then, a fortiori, it also can regulate the educational process directly.

Congress . Business Law Chapter 6. STUDY. PLAY. What creates the Congress, the presidency, vice presidency, and the supreme court? - basically gives state government the power to regulate business activities.

True or false: the state powers are limitless. Business Law Chapter 7. terms. Business Law, Chapter 1. 46 terms.

Chapter 4: . Mississippi both receives and offers reciprocity with a number of other states. Concealed weapon licenses are also available for a variety of guards and private security services. No license is required for a multitude of law enforcement related positions (e.g., investigators, judges, district attorneys, etc.) if the bearer has completed a weapons training course.

The Fed - Section Powers of Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System