Final answer:
The Supreme Court case United States v. Lopez (1995) limited the Commerce Clause power of the federal government, thereby granting more power to the states.
Step-by-step explanation:
The landmark Supreme Court case, United States v. Lopez (1995), marked a pivotal moment in constitutional law, specifically regarding the scope of federal authority under the Commerce Clause. In this case, the Court struck down the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, asserting that the law, which prohibited gun possession in school zones, did not have a substantial impact on interstate commerce, and therefore exceeded the federal government's constitutional authority.
The decision in Lopez represented a notable limitation on the expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause, which had been used to justify federal regulation of activities with even indirect effects on commerce. By ruling that the Gun-Free School Zones Act did not fall under the purview of interstate commerce, the Court reinforced the principle that there are limits to the federal government's power to regulate activities within the states.
This decision aligns with the concept of new federalism, emphasizing a rebalancing of power between the federal government and the states. The Court's ruling underscored the importance of maintaining a distinction between federal and state authority, highlighting the significance of state sovereignty. In effect, the decision in Lopez signaled a shift toward a more restrained view of federal power and a recognition of the autonomy of states in regulating matters that are primarily local in nature.
United States v. Lopez is viewed as part of a broader trend in constitutional jurisprudence emphasizing the limitations on federal authority, promoting a more decentralized approach to governance, and reinforcing the constitutional framework that respects the distinct spheres of influence for both the federal and state governments.