The background of the case began with a high school student, Alfonso Lopez, who carried a concealed weapon into Edison high school in San Antonio, Texas. According to the “United States v. Lopez”, he was charged under Texas law with firearm possession on school premises. However, the state charges that were made against Lopez was terminated and the federal representatives charged Lopez for violating the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. It states in the “United States v. Lopez”, that the act prohibits “any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that [he] knows...is a school zone.” At the end of a bench trial, Lopez was guilty and was sent to six months of imprisonment as well as two years of supervision when he is released from …show more content…
Lopez, there was a five to four decision. There was a question that affected the case, is the Gun-Free School Zones Act illegitimate because it surpasses the Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause? To answer to the previous question, the majority opinion by William H. Rehnquist said “Yes. The possession of a gun in a local school zone is not an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. The law is a criminal statute that has nothing to do with "commerce" or any sort of economic activity.” (Oyez). This information states that Rehnquist is arguing that the law is not related to the Commerce Clause and that the case is related to something local such as the local government or the state government should be handling. However, there is a different opinion about this case, the minority opinion by Stephen Gerald Breyer said the “Congress had a rational basis for finding a substantial connection between gun-related school violence and interstate commerce. Evidence exists that gun-related violence interferes with the quality of education in schools and education is related to economic viability.” (CaseBriefs). This commentary by Breyer states that Congress has a connection with the gun violence case and the Commerce Clause as well as stating that there is indication of gun violence disrupts education, in which education is part of economic