Lopez and Morrison address the scope of Congress's power. Which statement is correct?

• A. It allowed Congress to regulate all activities that affect interstate commerce.
• B. It held that Congress cannot regulate purely local non-economic activity lacking interstate effect.
• C. It allowed the President to regulate interstate commerce independently.
• D. It requires states to regulate commerce with other states.

Answer: (B)

Congress's power under the Commerce Clause has clear limits. Lopez and Morrison show that regulation must connect to interstate commerce in a real, substantial way, and purely local non-economic activities cannot be regulated by Congress simply because they have some indirect effect on interstate commerce.

In Lopez, the Court struck down a federal law criminalizing possession of a firearm in a school zone because that conduct is a local, non-economic activity with no substantial link to interstate commerce. The decision reinforces that Congress cannot regulate every activity that might remotely affect commerce; there has to be a substantial connection to economic activity or fall into one of the recognized channels for regulation.

In Morrison, the Court reinforced this approach by invalidating a provision of the Violence Against Women Act that tried to regulate non-economic, intrastate violence as a matter of interstate commerce, finding no substantial relation to commerce.

So the correct statement captures the essence: Congress cannot regulate purely local non-economic activity lacking interstate effect. The other options overstate congressional power, wrongly attribute independent federal authority to the President in this area, or misstate the role of states in regulating interstate commerce.