1

Carolyn Kilcoyne

Prof. Vegtor

Business 115-850

Module 2 Writing Assignment

Chapter 4 Questions:

3. The Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution grants Congress the power to

regulate commerce among the states. However, the regulation must involve activities that

substantially affect interstate commerce. In the case of United States v. Lopez, the issue at hand

is whether possessing a firearm in a school zone falls within the scope of interstate commerce

regulation.

The Court must assess whether the mere possession of a firearm near a school zone

significantly impacts interstate commerce. While ensuring school safety is undoubtedly

important, the act of possessing a firearm in a school zone is inherently a local and intrastate

activity, rather than one that directly affects interstate commerce.

The Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 does not include any provisions linking firearm

possession in school zones to interstate commerce. Unlike other laws regulating firearms that

may involve interstate transactions or commerce, this act primarily focuses on maintaining safety

within school premises.

Therefore, the Court should uphold the decision of the Court of Appeals and conclude

that the Gun-Free School Zones Act exceeds Congress's authority under the Commerce Clause.

This decision would affirm the limitations on federal power and maintain the balance of powers

between the federal government and the states.

 2

9. The validity of New Hampshire's tax law, which imposes taxes on the income of non-

residents working within the state, hinges on constitutional considerations, primarily under the

Commerce Clause and the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The Commerce

Clause grants Congress the authority to regulate commerce among the states, raising questions

about whether the taxation of non-residents could create a burden or discrimination against

interstate commerce. Courts would scrutinize whether the law discriminates against out-of-state

workers or imposes an undue burden on interstate economic activities.

Similarly, the Due Process Clause mandates that state laws afford fair treatment to all

individuals, including non-residents. Taxation of non-residents must satisfy due process

requirements, typically by demonstrating a sufficient nexus between the taxpayer and the state

imposing the tax. Judges would assess whether non-residents have a significant connection with

New Hampshire that justifies the taxation of their income earned within the state. Moreover,

considerations related to the Privileges and Immunities Clause may arise, prohibiting states from

favoring their own citizens over those of other states in fundamental rights, such as employment

opportunities.

Ultimately, the validity of New Hampshire's tax law would be determined through

judicial review, considering these constitutional principles, relevant legal precedent, and

statutory interpretation. Each case would be evaluated on its specific circumstances and the

extent to which the tax law respects the rights of non-residents while fulfilling the state's

legitimate interests in revenue generation and economic regulation.

11. Ellis's entitlement to a hearing, hinges on several key factors. Firstly, the terms of his

employment contract with the City of Lakewood are critical. If his contract specifies that he can

only be discharged for cause, then the reasons provided for his termination must align with this
 3

criterion. Additionally, if labor laws or regulations in his jurisdiction afford employees the right

to due process before termination, Ellis may be entitled to a hearing to contest the decision.

Furthermore, principles of procedural fairness come into play. Even if his contract does not

explicitly require a hearing, employers are generally expected to follow fair and transparent

procedures when making termination decisions. If Ellis was not given the opportunity to address

the concerns raised by his employer or rebut the allegations against him, he may argue that the

termination process was unfair and that he is entitled to a hearing as part of his right to

procedural fairness. Therefore, Ellis's claim to a hearing depends on the specific circumstances

of his employment and the relevant legal and contractual provisions governing termination.

Chapter 7 Questions:

3. In the case involving Baker and others at the Walmart store, the evidence suggests a

clear intent to commit larceny alongside significant actions in furtherance of that intent. Their

methodical entry into the store, using an acetylene torch to cut through a metal door,

demonstrates premeditation and planning indicative of criminal intent. Additionally, their

decision to enter the store in the early hours of the morning suggests a deliberate effort to avoid

detection and increase the likelihood of success in committing the crime.

Once inside the store, their actions solidify the intent to commit larceny. By moving

merchandise towards the rear door, Baker and his accomplices demonstrate a clear intention to

steal. While they were thwarted by the timely arrival of law enforcement before they could

complete the theft, their actions up to that point indicate a substantial step towards the

commission of the crime. In criminal law, the concept of attempted larceny recognizes that

individuals can be held accountable for their actions even if the crime is not fully carried out.
 4

Therefore, based on the established principles of criminal liability, the combination of

intent and action displayed by Baker and others provides a sufficient basis for prosecution for

larceny. Despite the absence of completed theft, their conduct constitutes a clear violation of the

law, warranting legal consequences for their attempted criminal activity.

8. James Durham, the proprietor of an art gallery, is confronted with a concerning pattern

regarding the sale of paintings from unknown artists at his weekly auctions. Despite his own

valuation assessments, the paintings consistently fetch prices ranging from $20,000 to $50,000,

significantly exceeding his expectations. Adding to his unease is the revelation that the bidders

participating in these auctions are employees of an olive distributor situated near the city's

shipping yards, an occupation seemingly unrelated to the art world. This confluence of factors

raises suspicions of potential money laundering activities. The inflated purchase prices, coupled

with the anonymity of the artists and the incongruous backgrounds of the bidders, suggest a

scheme to launder illicit funds through the art market. Recognizing the gravity of the situation,

Durham must prioritize due diligence measures to scrutinize the identities of the bidders and

trace the source of funds used in these transactions. Compliance with anti-money laundering

regulations becomes imperative, necessitating thorough documentation of sales and adherence to

know-your-customer protocols. By adopting a transparent approach and seeking guidance from

legal and financial experts, Durham can mitigate the risks posed by unwitting involvement in

money laundering and safeguard the integrity of his art gallery.

9. Jennings' operation of a carrier service to collect and deliver money established a fidu-
ciary relationship with his customers, wherein they entrusted him with their funds for a specific
purpose. However, instead of adhering strictly to the terms of his contract, Jennings took liberties
with the collected money by engaging in short-term investments to generate personal profit.
While Jennings ensured that the money was delivered to the customers within the agreed

timeframe, his decision to invest the funds for his own gain constituted a breach of trust. By
 5

diverting the funds into investments without the knowledge or consent of his customers, he

violated the implicit understanding that the money would be safeguarded and used solely for the

purpose of delivery.

Despite fulfilling the primary obligation of delivering the money punctually, Jennings'

unauthorized use of the funds for personal enrichment represents a clear case of embezzlement.

His actions demonstrate a disregard for the trust and expectations placed in him by his

customers, warranting legal consequences for his misconduct.