No. 19-7754

Erik Leonardus Peeters v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-02-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: commerce-clause congressional-power constitutional-safeguards extraterritorial-jurisdiction foreign-commerce-clause jurisdictional-limits non-commercial-conduct non-economic-conduct police-power united-states-v-al-maliki united-states-v-lopez united-states-v-morrison
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration Patent
Latest Conference: 2020-03-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does 18 U.S.C. § 2423(c)'s regulation of non-commercial, non-economic conduct of American citizens outside the United States exceed Congress's Foreign Commerce Clause power?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court has well-settled that the Commerce Clause gives Congress no general police power over non-commercial, non-economic conduct. See United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 567-68 (1995); United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, 617-18 (2000). The question before this Court is whether constitutional safeguards limiting Congress from exercising general police power apply to conduct outside the United States: Does 18 U.S.C. § 2423(c)’s regulation of noncommercial, non-economic conduct of American citizens outside the United States exceed Congress’s Foreign Commerce Clause power? i STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES United States v. Erik Leonardus Peeters, No. 2:09-cr-00932-CAS, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Judgment entered December 7, 2016. United States v. Erik Leonardus Peeters, No. 16-50471, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Judgment entered September 9, 2019; rehearing denied November 21, 2019. ii

Docket Entries

2020-03-23
Petition DENIED.
2020-03-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2020.
2020-03-02
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-02-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 25, 2020)

Attorneys

Erik Peeters
Ethan Atticus BaloghColeman & Balogh LLP, Petitioner
Ethan Atticus BaloghColeman & Balogh LLP, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent