United States v. John W. Kenney

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “Lopez ... did not call into question the well-established principle that Congress may regulate conduct even though that conduct already violates state law.”
• concluding that statute prohibiting possession of machine guns does not fall within the first category because it does more than regulate channels of interstate commerce
• holding statute prohibiting possession of a machine gun constitutional even though statute had “scant” legislative history and no jurisdictional statement
• “Permitting unregulated intrastate possessions and transfers of machine guns ... indirectly undermines, via a market theory, the effectiveness of the federal attempt to regulate interstate commerce in machine guns.”
• upholding § 922(o) under the third category, as a regulation of activities having a substantial effect on interstate commerce
• “Permitting unregulated intrastate possessions ... of machine guns ... indirectly undermines, via a market theory, the effectiveness of the federal attempt to regulate interstate commerce in machine guns. In other words, the intrastate activity ‘affects’ the interstate commerce....”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).