United States v. Lopez - Implications

The fact that the Supreme Court upheld the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision does not mean that gun laws will be more difficult to enforce; nor does it mean that guns should be allowed near schools. The main question in this case is not about guns or schools, but about how much authority the Congress has over issues usually legislated by the state. It is a question of the division of power between the federal and state governments, not of crime prevention.

The reason that the Gun-Free School Zone law was tried under the Commerce Clause is a traditionally broad interpretation of the clause to allow federal regulation of activities based on their relation to interstate commerce. Since guns often travel through more than one state in the path from manufacturer to purchaser, possession of guns may fall under this clause.

Some say that this ruling may simply signal to Congress that it must more carefully and explicitly detail how its legislation pertains to interstate commerce. Yet the impact of this decision could also be far reaching, affecting such laws as state environmental laws among others. Some commentators interpret this ruling to mean that Congress will not have the power to legislate with respect to local and non-economic activities. "At the very least, Lopez has introduced an element of instability in an area of the law previously considered `settled.' Commerce Clause cases clearly merit close watching in the future."