Reno v. Condon

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Revision as of 22:24, September 13, 2020 by Rezsue (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=528 U.S. 141 (2000) |date=2000 |subject=Constitutional Law |appealed_from= |case_treatment=No |overturned= |partially_...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Reno v. Condon
Court U.S. Supreme Court
Citation 528 U.S. 141 (2000)
Date decided 2000

Facts

Congress passes the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act which regulates the disclosure of personal information obtained by states’ DMVs. The DPAA prohibits states from distributing or selling drivers’ information without consent.

Issues

Whether the DPAA is a proper exercise of Congressional power to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause.

Whether the DPAA violates the Tenth amendment because it thrusts upon the States all of the responsibilities for administering its complex provisions.

Holding

Congress did not run afoul of established principles of federalism.

Rule

The DPAA is certainly a proper exercise of Congressional power under the Commerce Clause.

The DPAA is like Baker where the court held that the law regulates state activities rather than seeking to control or influence the manner in which States regulate private parties. It does not regulate the States to regulate their own citizens.