United States v. Stewart is an ongoing case in the Supreme Court of the United States, which relates to the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution which allows the United States Congress "To regulate Commerce ... among the several States."

The case

On June 3, 2002, Bob Stewart was sentenced to five years in prison. He was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and of possessing several unregistered machineguns -- homemade machineguns. The case deals with whether Congress can, under its Commerce Clause power, prohibit the mere possession of homemade machineguns. The law challenged is Section 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) which makes it unlawful to “transfer or possess a machinegun."

Background

An ATF search of Mr. Stewart's residence turned up thirty-one firearms, including five machineguns. The machineguns had been machined and assembled by Stewart. Stewart was charged and convicted of one count of felony possession of firearms in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and § 924(a)(2), and five counts of unlawful possession of a machinegun in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o). Stewart appealed his conviction for unlawful possession of machineguns, claiming that 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) is an invalid exercise of Congress’s commerce power and violates the Second Amendment.

Ninth Circuit Court Appeals opinion

Mr. Stewart won his case in an opinion rendered by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, on November 13th, 2003. The Department of Justice then request and received a stay, while they appealed the case to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that:

• "...a homemade machinegun may be part of a gun collection or may be crafted as a hobby. Or it may be used for illegal purposes. Whatever its intended use, without some evidence that it will be sold or transferred—and there is none here—its relationship to interstate commerce is highly attenuated."

• "...section 922(o) contains no jurisdictional element anchoring the prohibited activity to interstate commerce."

• "...there is no evidence that section 922(o) was enacted to regulate commercial aspects of the machinegun business. More likely, section 922(o) was intended to keep machineguns out of the hands of criminals—an admirable goal, but not a commercial one."

Current status

The case is currently on the Supreme Court's docket, with it last set for Conference on January 7, 2005. However, arguments have not been scheduled through April 2005, and the case will therefore not be heard earlier than late in 2005, if at all. It is believed by some that the court is waiting until the Ashcroft v. Raich decision, a case similarly relating to the Commerce Clause, before hearing arguments for this case. A review of United States v. Lopez would lead one to believe that the overturning of this law is quite feasible if it is ever argued.

External links and references

• Supreme Court Docket 04-617
• 9th Circuit Court opinion - The judgement in favor of Mr. Stewart
• Department of Justice petition for a writ of centiorari - DOJ arguments for a stay on the 9th Circuit Court decision and DOJ presented viewpoint of the case.