United States v. Stewart (2003)
United States v. Stewart, 348 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 2003) and 451 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2006), is a Ninth Circuit case involving a challenge to the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found against the defendant, ruling that possession of homemade machine guns can be constitutionally regulated by the United States Congress under the Commerce Clause. Background. Robert W. Stewart, Jr., a convicted felon, sold parts kits to make Maadi-Griffin .50 caliber rifles, which he  advertised on the Internet and in "Shotgun News". A Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives agent discovered that Stewart had a prior conviction for possession and transfer of a machine gun 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) and began an investigation. An undercover agent purchased kits and determined that it could be "readily . . . converted" into an unlawful firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3)(A). The ATF agent then applied for and received a federal search warrant for Stewart's residence. During a search by the ATF of the Stewart Residence, agents discovered thirty-one firearms, including five machine  guns which Stewart had machined and assembled. In United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Stewart was convicted of one count for being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2), and five counts for unlawful possession of a machine gun in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o). On June 3, 2002, Stewart was sentenced to five years in federal prison. Stewart appealed his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), claiming it exceeds Congress's commerce clause power and violates the Second Amendment, and for possession of a firearm by a felon on  Second Amendment grounds. Circuit Court. On November 13, 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion vacating Stewart's conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), but affirmed his convictions for being a felon in possession of a firearm. Using the "Morrison" test, the Ninth Circuit ruled 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) did not have a substantial effect on interstate commerce and was unconstitutional as applied. In its opinion the circuit court wrote: Supreme Court. After the Ninth Circuit's ruling, the United States Department of Justice then requested and received a stay while it appealed the case to the Supreme  Court of the United States. Citing the results of the "Gonzales v. Raich" case (June 5, 2005), the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case but rather to vacate the ruling below and remand it to court of appeals "in light of" "Raich". The Ninth Circuit was thereby directed to reconsider "Stewart" and be guided in that reconsideration by "Raich". "Raich" holds that Congress can use the Commerce Clause to ban homegrown marijuana due to its potential to affect the supply and demand in the interstate market. Circuit Court reversal. The Ninth Circuit reconsidered the case as directed and  on June 30, 2006, reversed its decision and found in favor of the United States. In its opinion, the court wrote: