In the void of Foreign Commerce Clause jurisprudence, appellate courts have advanced several problematic approaches for establishing the boundaries of Congress’s constitutional power. Fortunately, the Third Circuit took a step in the right direction in United States v. Pendleton by adopting the Interstate Commerce Clause framework that the Supreme Court established in United States v. Lopez. Unfortunately, however, the Third Circuit adjudicated Pendleton under Lopez’s “Channels of Commerce” prong and found 18 U.S.C. § 2423(c) to be a constitutional exercise of Congress’s foreign commerce authority. This holding is important because such deference to Congress’s foreign commerce power can encroach upon foreign nations’ sovereignty and transform the U.S. Government into a global police force, inconsistent with the limitations of the Constitution. This Comment examines the Third Circuit’s ruling in Pendleton, argues that the Third Circuit incorrectly applied Lopez to that case, and contends that a correct application would have demonstrated that § 2423(c) is unconstitutional.
U.S. Interpol: The Far-Reaching Consequences of United States v. Pendleton,
46 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 391
Available at: http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol46/iss1/10