United States v. Hemani · ¶73

In upholding § 922(g) under the Commerce Clause, the courts of appeals have misapprehended our precedents in two ways. Some have thought that Scarborough's statutory holding required them to uphold § 922(g)'s constitutionality. Others have concluded that the presence of a so-called “jurisdictional hook” in § 922(g) renders the statute constitutional under Lopez and Morrison. Neither rationale establishes that § 922(g) is constitutional.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.