No. 18-5882

Daniel Vela v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-09-05
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: commerce-clause constitutional-limits criminal-law federal-power felon-in-possession gun-control police-power second-amendment statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2018-10-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the federal Unlawful Felon in Possession of a Firearm statute (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) exceed Congress's authority to regulate under the Commerce Clause?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Recently this Court and individual Justices have increasingly explained that Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause to criminalize conduct otherwise falling under the states’ traditional police power is subject to limits—and that those limits have teeth. Q: In light of Bond v. United States,’ Nat'l Fed’n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius,” and the dissent from denial of certiorari in Alderman v. United States,’ does the federal Unlawful Felon in Possession of a Firearm statute (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) exceed Congress’s authority to regulate under the Commerce Clause? ' US. __, 134 S.Ct. 2077 (2014). > US. _, 132 S.Ct. 2566 (2012) (NFIB). 7131S. Ct. 700, 701 (Thomas and Scalia, JJ., dissenting from denial of certiorari), citing United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 558-559 (1995). il PARTIES Daniel Vela is the Petitioner; he was the defendant-appellant below. The United States of America is the Respondent; it was the plaintiff-appellee below. iii

Docket Entries

2018-10-09
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-09-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-08-31
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 5, 2018)

Attorneys

Daniel Vela
Jerry V. BeardOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Jerry V. BeardOffice of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent