US v. Lopez was a decision handed down by the US Supreme Court in 1995. The case was significant because it was the first ruling to set limits on Congress's power under the Commerce Claus in the Constitution since Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. Lopez, a student was caught with an unloaded weapon on school grounds that he was allegedly selling. He was arrested under the Gun-Free Zone law. Lopez argued that this law was unconstitutional as it blocked interstate commerce.
Brief Arizona v. Hicks 480 U.S. 321 (1987) Facts: A bullet was fired through the floor of Hick’s apartment on April 18th, 1987. The bullet injured a man in the apartment below Hick’s apartment. Police officers arrived at Hick’s apartment to investigate the shooting. Upon investigating, the police officers seized 3 weapons and a stocking mask. Also, while investigating, one of the police officers noticed expensive stereo equipment.
Lawrence v. Texas 539 US 558 (2003) Case Facts: In September 1998, a same-sex couple in Houston, Texas were arrested in their own apartment after police found them engaging in a consensual, intimate, sexual act. The two men, John Lawrence and Tyron Garner, were convicted of violating the Texas “Homosexual Conduct” Law, which made it a Class-C misdemeanor for same-sex adults to engage in sexual intercourse and considered it illegal sodonomy. The statute was created in 1973 after the state changed its criminal code to end the banning of heterosexual anal or oral sex. The sheriff deputies arrested and charged the couple for performing “deviate sexual intercourse” as listed in the mentioned in the Texas statute.
In 1995, the Act was invalidated by the Supreme Court Case during the case of “United States v. Lopez”. Essentially, what happened was Alfonso Lopez, Jr., a twelfth grade student of Edison High School of San Antonio, Texas, brought a .38 caliber revolver into school, claiming he was delivering
The decision by the District Judge came just before a contempt of court hearing was to be heard. In the case, Joe Arpaio was accused of ignoring summons given by a Judge. Two prominent newsmen and civil rights activist Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin joined the voices of those disenchanted by the Judge’s
Texas v. Johnson (1989) was a Supreme court case deciding whether or not flag burning is supported by “symbolic speech” protected by the first amendment. Gregory Lee Johnson is caught burning the American flag in Dallas, Texas in 1989 to protest Ronald Reagan`s policies. When Johnson had burned the flag during the protest the state of Texas arrested him for desecrating a venerated object. Although Johnson did not hurt or threaten to hurt anyone witnesses and spectators claimed to be seriously offended by seeing Johnson burn the flag. Most of the people in the courtroom were sided with Gregory Johnson supporting the fact that flag burning is considered as symbolic speech which is protected by the first amendment.
A 31-year-old man has been charged with the murder of a 27-year-old woman who was killed last year while jogging in Massachusetts, reported by the ABC News. According to Worcester County District Attorney Joseph Early Jr., Angelo Colon-Ortiz has been found guilty in the murder of Vanessa Marcotte by a grand jury Worcester County. Early said, Colon-Ortiz is on bail of $10 million by the authorities but will be brought in the Court later on date. Colon-Ortiz was arrested two months ago after his DNA samples were matched with the samples found on Marcotte 's hands.
Lopez won the U.S. V. Lopez case making it important because in terms of congressional power since it would go against the rights given in article 1 section 8 number 10 that says, “To define and punish…offences against the Law of Nations. Aside from that it would have an effect on interstate commerce, thing that congress regulates as mentioned in article 1 section 8 number 3. Since Lopez won, the laws for the state had to change causing the state to have its own rules and punishments from the ones for the whole U.S. The Lopez case is an implied power due to article 1 and has many cons. The case of Lopez is considered implied power because his case went against the power of congress. In article 1, congress has the power to define and punish
Sandra Bland was the potential offender in a traffic stop initiated by Officer Brian Encinia. Sandra Bland, in my opinion, clearly had a great passion for the rights of the American population. She appeared to be rather educated regarding her as well as others’ rights. Officer Encinia, in my opinion, appeared to be unwavering regarding his duty and obligations as an officer of the law.
One of the interesting court cases in Chicano History involves Gomez vs the City of Watsonville. To start, Section 2, and 5 in Voting Right’s Act plays a huge part in winning the case. Section 2 involves the prohibition of voting practices to discriminate and not allow a citizen of the united states to vote due to their race, color, or language domain. Similarly, Section 5, the act requires a preclearance from the Department of Justice for “ any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, or standard, practice or procedure with respect to voting,” in any covered jurisdiction; therefore changes should not discriminate based on someone’s race. On July 27, 1988, the plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth District Court of Appeals, resulting on July 27, 1988, to overturned the local
As seen in the CNN article (regarding Elonis v. U.S.), the Supreme Court needs information regarding previous court cases in order to make a determination in the Elonis case. They summon an Amicus Curiae brief (“friend of the court” brief) asking you to provide information about the First Amendment. Specifically they ask, “What is the current precedent concerning freedom of speech?” Begin your response here:
The U.S is one of the biggest advocates for gun rights and also the world leading country for gun ownership. Most recent data shows that we hold first place for country with the most guns per capita at 88.8 per 100 persons.(cbcnews.com) You would think that a country that supports gun ownership that much would allow for them to be carried everywhere with certain exceptions. Our right to keep a gun is protected by the second amendment, which says “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.” One of the most controversial topics regarding guns is weather or not we should be allowed to carry them on school buildings.
He and Clark M. Neily, gathered six people to be the plaintiffs. Dick Heller a police officer that carried a hand gun all day but wasn’t allowed to have one in his home. He wanted this law to be removed. The Supreme Court overruled the local law and allowed for gun ownership and adjusted the rules for guns.
A Decision of Paramount Importance At what point do we finally decide to take the first step in improving safety in public schools around the nation? This is the question that should be asked when a state attempts to determine whether or not the teachers of Kansas public schools who are lawfully permitted to carry a concealed firearm should be allowed to carry them into their classrooms. This is a controversial subject that is rather split in terms of the opinions of the people. In an online survey from debate.org, approximately 53% of people said that teachers should be allowed to carry firearms for several reasons such as protection of the students and deterrence of crimes.
In 1995, Alfonzo Lopez was arrested for carrying a gun to school. He was later arrested for possession of a gun and violating the Gun-Free Zone Act. . However; Lopez appealed that the Gun-Free Zone Act was an unconstitutional act on congress, which made the appeal go to the Supreme Court. COURT CASE HISTORY United States
