Alderman, who was on parole for felony robbery, was arrested for buying cocaine. At the time of his arrest, he was wearing a bulletproof vest, so he was charged with violating a federal law that makes it illegal for a person convicted of a felony involving a crime of violence to possess body armor. Alderman challenged the constitutionality of the Body Armor Act of 2002, contending that it exceeded Congress's authority under the Commerce Clause. The district court rejected that argument and convicted him of violating the statute. Alderman appealed. Do you think the court upheld the authority of Congress to pass the statute? Why or why not? What case discussed in this chapter is relevant to the decision? United States v. Alderman, 565 F.3d 641 (9th Cir. 2009).