Moot Court Case
South Dakota v Dole
Petitioners (South Dakota)
-Main Arguments:
South Dakota allows people 19 or older to be able to purchase beer that has up to 3.2% alcohol
The Secretary of Transportation would take away 5% of the state’s highway fundings if the state didn’t make their legal drinking age 21. South Dakota said violates the constitutional limitations on congressional exercise of the spending power and violates the Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution Skelton, Chris. "South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987)." Justia Law. Accessed November 13, 2017. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/483/203/case.html.
Questions:
Respondents (Dole)
-Main Arguments:
Congress desired to have all states have …show more content…
Code § 922 states “It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone”
Congress argued that they can regulate activities relating to commerce through the commerce clause “regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.”
Congress argued that people might not want to go through areas knowing there is gun violence which affects interstate commerce
-Questions
Does Congress have the right to have control over public schools?
Does Congress have the right to regulate public schools using the commerce clause?
Was Congress’ power abused using the commerce clause?
How does Lopez bringing a gun on school grounds affect interstate activity?
Would it have been better if the state government took care of the situation or Congress?
Respondents (Lopez)
-Main Arguments:
Lopez argued that Congress could not exercise the Gun Free School Zones act because it was unconstitutional for them to do
South Dakota v Dole
Petitioners (South Dakota)
-Main Arguments:
South Dakota allows people 19 or older to be able to purchase beer that has up to 3.2% alcohol
The Secretary of Transportation would take away 5% of the state’s highway fundings if the state didn’t make their legal drinking age 21. South Dakota said violates the constitutional limitations on congressional exercise of the spending power and violates the Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution Skelton, Chris. "South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987)." Justia Law. Accessed November 13, 2017. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/483/203/case.html.
Questions:
Respondents (Dole)
-Main Arguments:
Congress desired to have all states have …show more content…
Code § 922 states “It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone”
Congress argued that they can regulate activities relating to commerce through the commerce clause “regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.”
Congress argued that people might not want to go through areas knowing there is gun violence which affects interstate commerce
-Questions
Does Congress have the right to have control over public schools?
Does Congress have the right to regulate public schools using the commerce clause?
Was Congress’ power abused using the commerce clause?
How does Lopez bringing a gun on school grounds affect interstate activity?
Would it have been better if the state government took care of the situation or Congress?
Respondents (Lopez)
-Main Arguments:
Lopez argued that Congress could not exercise the Gun Free School Zones act because it was unconstitutional for them to do