Original sentence: " Judicial rulings against attempted use of Congress's Commerce Clause powers continued during the 1930s.In the 1990s, the Court acted to restrain Congress's exercise of its power to regulate commerce.Lopez, the Court found that Congress could not exercise "Police power" reserved to the States by use of the Commerce Clause.The Court, returning to the theories propounded by John Marshall, ruled that Congress could pass laws regulating actions that even indirectly influenced interstate commerce.This dramatic change in the Court's thinking was brought about by FDR's Court Packing scheme
Edited sentence: " Judicial restraint on Congress's Commerce Clause powers continued during the 1930s.Congress passed acts that punished crimes on the absurd grounds that they discouraged individuals from engaging in interstate commerce; including various other acts pertaining to different areas of life where Congress abused their entrusted power of regulation over interstate commerce (away from the original intent of the founders) as an excuse to justify their expansion of federal power over the liberties, rights, and powers guarenteed in the U.Constitutiion to the states and individual citizens of the United States.In the 1990s, however, the Court acted to restrain Congress's unconstitutional exercise of their now stretched, over-extensive power to regulate commerce.Lopez, the Court found that Congress could not exercise "Police power" that were reserved to the states.The Court, returning to the theories propounded by John Marshall, ruled that Congress could pass laws that regulate actions that even indirectly influenced interstate commerce.This dramatic change in the Court's thinking was brought about by FDR's Court Packing scheme, which threatened the independence of the Court