ipl-logo

How Does Congress Regulate Gun Control?

588 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Gun control in the us

The judicial doctrine is based upon the basic constitutional principle that in those areas where the founding fathers gave Congress the constitutional authority to regulate gun control, Congress has the right to insist on one uniform set of national regulations. Once Congress exercises this right by enacting a comprehensive set of federal regulations, the states are constitutionally prohibited from adopting any regulations that are inconsistent with the federal regulations. Essentially, when Congress exercises its constitutional authority “to regulate commerce…among the several states,” it may decide to “occupy the field” and thereby preempt states from regulating inconsistently. But federal preemption is elective. Congress can decide to occupy …show more content…

In essence, Congress may decline to adopt an “either/or” approach and develop federal regulations but allow states to develop their own regulations. This has been the strategy adopted by Congress for the regulation of firearms. Congress has neither “occupied the field” exclusively nor completely abdicated its authority to the states. Rather, it has elected to pursue a strategy whereby states are free to regulate firearms simultaneously with the federal government. Under this approach, there are two independent regulatory schemes—one at the federal level and one at the state level. Accordingly, anyone who is involved in the purchase or ownership of firearms must comply with both sets of regulations. Where there is inconsistency, the individual must comply with whichever law is stricter. The flip side of the doctrine of federal preemption is the doctrine of states’ rights, where each state has the right to regulate certain activities free from federal interference. The doctrine of states’ rights has roots in the United States

Show More
Related
536 Words | 3 Pages

The states can contest the federal government rules and regulations in the federal judiciary branch. The states have contested federal laws, incidence of them blocking federal authorities from enforcing federal laws and cases involving individuals who break federal laws, but not state law (Levy, 2013). The ability of states to challenge federal laws that they feel are unconstitutional is part of our system of democracy. These challenges have led to parts of a law or the full law to be unconstitutional and overturned by the

Read More
500 Words | 2 Pages

The ruling resulted in the leverage that federal law presides over state

Read More
835 Words | 4 Pages

Kristen Irvine 9/22/15 AP Government Ms. Suski Federalism The relationship between the states as outlined by sections one, two, and four of Article four in the Constitution examines how states should interact between each other. The first section of this amendment is the Full Faith and Credit Clause which says that judicial decrees and contracts made in one state will be binding and enforceable in any other state. The second section of Article four states that citizens of one state shall be entitled to the same privileges and immunities in another state. The fourth section of the fourth Article states that the federal government will ensure a republican form of government in all states. These four sections of the Fourth Amendment are all

Read More
839 Words | 4 Pages

I feel that state laws associated with firearms need uniformity. The federal government has to pass a gun law for all states to follow. Gun laws issues are extremely critical because it can save thousands of people’s

Read More
1335 Words | 6 Pages

In an attempt to steer the Court back in the right direction after the judicial misstep in Jones & Laughlin, the Court makes the clear distinction that the criminal statute (Gun-Free School Zones Act) in question “has nothing to do with ‘commerce’ or any sort of economic enterprise, however broadly one might define those terms.” Bringing up the central issue with the Jones & Laughlin case, Rehnquist further explains, “the Government admits, under its “costs of crime” reasoning, that Congress could regulate not only all violent crime, regardless of how tenuously they relate to interstate commerce.” In the Jones & Laughlin case, the central problem was the ability to connect anything with interstate commerce, no matter how indirect. The court, in this case, is limiting the scope of that interpretation by clearly demonstrating how criminal matters cannot line up with interstate commerce unless one piles inference upon inference. The Court further explains this issue by saying, “we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner what would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States.”

Read More
718 Words | 3 Pages

The right of the “ regulated militia” to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It would make sense if this is what the Anti-Federalists meant when they included this amendment. This interpretation gives the state's more power because the federal government

Read More
1024 Words | 5 Pages

This said that the amendment didn’t really take place if a state law didn’t agree to it. Another case was Another very similar example was the case United States vs Jack Miller. The website observed, “In the 1939 case of United States v Jack Miller, police arrested known bank robber Jack Miller and his associate, Frank Layton, for carrying an unregistered gun across state lines, which was prohibited by the National Firearms Act. The men claimed that the Act violated their Second Amendment rights, but the court disagreed. The court ruled that the Amendment allows the government to regulate ownership of certain types of firearms, including fully automatic firearms and short-barreled rifles and shotguns.”

Read More
506 Words | 3 Pages

“Federalism is a system of government in which entities such as states or provinces share power with a national government. The United States government functions according to the principles of federalism.” Implied powers doctrine came out by the State of Maryland to block the operations of federally supported Second Bank of the United States. The state Legislature placed a tax on notes held by all banks originally built outside of the state. It didn’t speak of the Second Bank, the Supreme Court discovered that it could establish that this was the reason of the law, given that no other out of state banks existed in Maryland.

Read More
517 Words | 3 Pages

Also noteworthy, Winkler follows IRAC. He clearly identifies an issue, then states “this discussion here is informed by the example of state constitutional law” (Winkler 686), which would be applying standards, analyzes both sides of the debate in the meat of his article, then establishes a conclusion which is, “The history of deferential review under the reasonable regulation standard is as good an indication as any that, even if the Second Amendment is reinterpreted to protect an individual right, almost all gun control laws are likely to remain constitutional” (Winkler

Read More
880 Words | 4 Pages

The review expanded from pre-Second Amendment times in England and up through the 1800’s America. From their historical review, the court determined that beneath English laws concealed carry has been regulated and prohibited since the mid 1500’s. The court viewed the Second Amendment narrowly, taking note that the Second Amendment does not explicitly say that citizens have the right to “carry concealed.” Due to the consistency of state courts ruling on the Second Amendment and concealed carry the en banc court held that the Second Amendment does not, to any degree, guarantee any citizen the right to carry concealed firearms in

Read More
1673 Words | 7 Pages

The states in America do not have to allow the people to keep the Right To Bear Arms. If a state does not accept the bear arms then the people do not have the right to bear arms and if

Read More
1075 Words | 5 Pages

As far as John Paul Stevens can tell, "federal judges uniformly understood that the right protected by the text was limited in two ways: first, it applied only to keeping and bearing arms for military purposes, and second, while it limited the power of the federal government, it did not impose any limit whatsoever on the power of states or local governments to regulate the ownership or use of firearms." He recalls a colorful remark on the topic by the late Warren Burger, who served as chief justice from 1969 to 1986. To support the change, he argues: "Emotional claims that the right to possess deadly weapons is so important that it is protected by the federal Constitution distort intelligent debate about the wisdom of particular aspects of proposed legislation designed to minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands."

Read More
1549 Words | 7 Pages

The topic of gun control and firearm regulation has been subject to heated debate for a long while. Both sides have potent arguments, however the core of this issue ultimately boils down to the constitution itself. More specifically the second amendment. This argument quickly becomes quite complicated because gun control and firearm regulation concerns not only the right of citizens, but more importantly the safety of citizens. The second amendment helps to guarantee an imperative right belonging to all citizens.

Read More
1108 Words | 5 Pages

One of the most controversial issues our nation faces today is gun control laws. This controversy has been created due to the different interpretations of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution which states the right of citizens to bear arms; “a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” (Cornell Law School). Anti-gun control laws believe that the amendment guarantees the right to bear any kind of firearms. On the other hand, we have does that believe that more controls laws should be implemented since the 2nd amendment was for the right of States to have an armed militia during wartime. Both sides have strong point, however, the safety of our children comes first, and a firearm means death in the wrong hands.

Read More
531 Words | 3 Pages

Looking at the issue of gun rights, I am a firm believer that this right should strictly be a state issue. There are various factors that can play a great role in the culture of each state. Things such as population density, geography, morality, childhood, political status, and religion impact states and the way they function. If each state shared the same law related to gun rights, it would ultimately defeat the goal of allowing each state to create laws based on their culture, and would most likely become a federal law, limiting the right of some. Being born and raised in Wyoming, I see no issues with all citizens having the right to bear arms.

Read More

More about How Does Congress Regulate Gun Control?

Related Topics

Open Document