Which case held that possession of a gun in a school zone is not an economic activity with a substantial effect on commerce?

• A. Wickard v. Filburn (1942)
• B. Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States (1964)
• C. United States v. Lopez (1995)
• D. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

Answer: (C)

The important idea is the scope of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and when activity is considered to have a substantial economic effect. United States v. Lopez holds that banning possession of a gun in a school zone is a non-economic activity that does not have a substantial effect on interstate commerce, so it cannot be justified under the Commerce Clause. The Court contrasted this with cases like Wickard v. Filburn, where local economic activity (wheat production) affected interstate commerce in a substantial way, and Heart of Atlanta Motel, where discriminatory practices by a business had clear interstate implications. Gibbons v. Ogden is the foundational case establishing that Congress can regulate interstate commerce more broadly, but Lopez draws a boundary: Congress can regulate channels, instrumentalities, or activities that have a substantial economic impact, not non-economic activities like gun possession in a school zone.