Netania Pantry.

Netania Pantry

Many Supreme court cases have massively impacted states all around the U.S. If many of these cases turned out alternatively the U.S could still be very racist and prejudice. In other cases, the outcomes changed gun laws, drug laws, women’s rights, etc. The cases that will be discussed in this essay are U.S. v Lopez, Engel v Vitale, and Citizens United v FEC. These cases touch on ideas such as federalism, freedom of speech, and biased propaganda.

         US v Lopez is a court case that found school gun zone law violated the Constitution. In the Supreme Court case McCullough v Maryland it decided that the federal government had authority over state laws. This was wrestled in US v Lopez. In 1992 Alfonso Lopez walked in a high with a 38 caliber gun. He was found, arrested, and charged with violating the texas state laws of no gun possession on school boundaries. Later those charges were dropped but federal charges came shortly after. Those state charges were dropped due to the federal law that states the government has authority or control over state laws. Lopez was charged with violating the Gun-Free act of 1990. His lawyers argued that Lopez should not be charged at federal jurisdiction only state jurisdiction since school is under state jurisdiction. Meaning that Congress did not have the power to pass the law because the state has jurisdiction of the school. The federal government argued that the law was fell congress's power because of the commerce clause which gives congress to regulate the  Lopez was convicted by the District Court on a bench trial and he was sentenced to six months imprisonment and two years probation. The sentence was later reversed by The Court of appeals on the ground that the law was beyond congress power to make laws over local public school. The final disposition of the court case was the Supreme Court found that the law was unconstitutional because congress was overreaching their powers that were granted in the commerce clause. The was 5-4 for the Supreme court. The court that decided the decision of US v Lopez was seen as a mainly conservative case. The federal government argued that the Gun-free School law was constitutional because of the commerce clause. They also argued that the gun possession on school grounds would substantially affect interstate commerce. Chief justice William Rehnquist played a huge role in the decision of US v Lopez as he was conservative found that the federal government trying to argue that the Gun-free School Act of 1990 was constitutional and that Lopez having a gun on school grounds has affected the interstate commerce and has an economic impact on the commerce. Chief justice Rehnquist said this in the ruling of the case. “The possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, substantially affect any sort of interstate commerce. Respondent was a local student at a local school; there is no indication that he had recently moved in interstate commerce, and there is no requirement that his possession of the firearm has any concrete tie to interstate commerce. To uphold the Government's contentions here, we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States.” U.S v Lopez first was heard at federal district court but the motion was denied. Lates Lopez and his lawyers appealed to the Fifth Circuit court of Appeals. This originated under the circumstance that the Lopez was being charged at the federal level. The amendment that most commonly relates to this case is the tenth amendment which is dealing with the powers of congress and the powers of the state. I say the tenth amendment because the federal government tried to argue this. This case is a reflection of the tenth amendment because the federal government felt they were in the right in making the law, this whole battles with federalism. One societal issue this case relates is gun possession. In the past couple of years, there have been a lot of school and mass shootings all across the country. 

    In 1951 the state board of regents of New York composed a non-denominational prayer for public schools in New York to recite along with the pledge of allegiance. Students were able to volunteer to the prayer or the students could walk out. Some students did exit the room or remained silent risked being ostracized by the other students in the class. The prayer was conducted like a Christian prayer with heads bowed and palms pressed together. A student named Michael Engel adopted the prayer in 1958. His father Steven Engel and parents of other students joined together to protest the prayer. They argued that this non-denominational prayer violates the first amendment which says that congress cannot make a law that respects the establishment of religion. The Board of Regents did not take that into consideration and the parent filed a lawsuit. The case later reached the Supreme Court in 1962. In a 6 to 1 decision the court sided with Engel and the parent group. The case was in favor of Engel and the other parents because the state of New York officially approved religion and congress violated the first amendment by creating the non-denominational prayer. Associate Justice Hugo stated this about the ruling, “ The First Amendment was added to the Constitution to stand as a guarantee that neither the power nor the prestige of the Federal Government would be used to control, support or influence the kinds of prayer the American people can say . . . Under that Amendment's prohibition against governmental establishment of religion, as reinforced by the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, government in this country, be it state or federal, is without power to prescribe by law any particular form of prayer which is to be used as an official prayer in carrying on any program of governmentally sponsored religious activity.” The court that decided was liberal with only one against and one justice not taking. Even though this court case did not eliminate prayer and it lets students have the choice to pray in school or not.  The case was first heard at the New York Supreme Court level with the circumstance that the parents union filed a lawsuit against the New York Board of Regents. The amendments that Engel V Vitale is the first amendment and the fourteenth amendment. The first amendment because the students do not really have a choice of freedom of religion and the first amendment for the government establishing religion in schools and making a law for it. 

     Citizens United v FEC is a court case in which Citizens United file an injunction against the Federal Election Commission. To prevent a film from being produced which would give the opinions of Former senator Hilary Rodham Clinton and whether or not she would make a good president. This Supreme Court case dealt with the first amendment and freedom of speech. Citizens United argued that if certain news reports and such could be reported and biased then why could there not be biased corporations. During bush administration, congress made a law that says that a corporate union couldn’t talk about a candidate within 60 days of the general election or thirty days before the primary. Citizens United took this court. In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled in favor of Citizens United making it legal and Union or corporation could run any propaganda about any candidate without there being legal trouble. The court was bipartisan decision because chief justice Roberts was more conservative but could operate with the liberals in the court. 

   U.S V Lopez, Engel V Vitale, and Citizens United V FEC have impact society majorly today. With U.S V Lopez we saw the Supreme Court made a decision that put the powers of to a smaller. What would have happened had they favor in the United States, would there Gun-Free schools zones all around the country, would there be less school shooting. With Engel V Vitale we saw the supreme make decision say that prayer was not allowed be part of an activity during school but could be done on their own time. These supreme court cases have impacted the world we live hugely, without there would be huge chaos.