Court Opinion

ID: 9440479
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 16:48:52.272763+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:27:42.746557
License: Public Domain

LAPLANTE, District Judge,
concurring.
As explained in my recent dissent in United States v. Volungus, No. 09-1596, 595 F.3d 1, 10, 2010 WL 46968, at *9 (1st Cir. Jan.8, 2010), I have serious concerns about whether the Walsh Act is necessary and proper to the exercise of Congress’s enumerated powers. Since the Supreme Court has already heard oral argument in a case that raises that very issue, see United Stales v. Comstock, 551 F.3d 274 (4th Cir.2009), cert. granted, - U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 2828, 174 L.Ed.2d 551 (2009), I would prefer to wait for the Supreme Court’s ruling rather than remand this case now and create potentially unnecessary work for the district court. Carta will remain in federal custody either way, at least in the short term.
Notwithstanding this preference, I concur fully in the majority opinion because I recognize that Volungus, which upheld the Walsh Act as a valid exercise of Congress’s authority, is now the established law of this circuit.