O the court has never doubted that there must be some

This preview shows page 22 - 24 out of 45 pages.

o The court has never doubted that there must be some outer limits on the federal power to interfere with the core functions implicit in state sovereignty o Can states receive immunity from federal legislation when they are acting as businesses? US v. California (1936) National League of Cities v. Usery (1976) State-autonomy defense to otherwise valid federal regulation finally succeeded Limited what subject matters congress might regulate with respect to the states Fair labor standards act o Minimum wage and maximum hours Traditional state function o Does congress have this power? Yes, under commerce authority, but nonetheless found it unconstitutional o Did it before 1937? No, but New deal Appellants: By regulating state and local government to enact this law of federalism, it violates the 10th Amendment – offense to principle Application of this law to the states themselves – whether the “[Congress may not] directly displace the state’s freedom to structure integral operations in areas of traditional governmental functions” Dissent: o No justification o States are perfectly capable of protecting themselves thru virtue of the structure of the government o 1985 Supreme Court reverses direction Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1985) Court held a municipal transit authority properly subject to the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act Some judicial intervention might still be appropriate “to compensate for possible failings in the national political process.” Overrules Nat’l League o Making exceptions by defining ‘traditional government functions’ is unworkable “Commandeering” state governments. o Congress may not be able to commandeer the legislative processes of the States by directly compelling them to enact and enforce a federal regulatory program or conscript state agencies into the national bureaucratic army Decisions that merely limit by what method Congress may regulate the states: New York v. United States (1992) Invalidated a law for commandeering state legislatures Federal statute in question – Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 o Specified that a state that fails to provide for the disposal of all internally generated radioactive waste must, upon the request of the waste generator or owner, take title to possession of the waste First, the take title provision is unconstitutional Congress cannot commandeer states’ regulations Anti-commandeering case Distortion in accountability 22
o If federal government was allowed to force regulations on state government then there would be no transparency that we are allowed to see in the states Constitutional limit The federal government may not compel the states to enact or administer a federal regulatory program The federal government may incentivize but not force Commandeering state executive branch officials .

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture