1 / 7

National Supremacy…

National Supremacy…. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). 10 th does not limit fed. Gov. to powers in Con. Necessary & Proper Cl. - power to create bank. When state/national powers conflict – national “is supreme within its sphere of action”. Dual Federalism.

knoton
Télécharger la présentation

National Supremacy…

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. National Supremacy… McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) 10th does not limit fed. Gov. to powers in Con Necessary & Proper Cl. - power to create bank When state/national powers conflict – national “is supreme within its sphere of action”

  2. Dual Federalism Both sovereign within own sphere of action Hammer v. Dagenhart 1918 -the power of the national government under the Commerce Clause to ban goods produced by child labor from sale in interstate commerce. Broad nat’l gov. power over almost every aspect of American life Narrow limits power of federal gov. over the states Comm. Clause defined narrowly

  3. States Rights vs. Civil Rights Brown v. Board of Education 1954 Education is a reserved power –10th am. Neither National gov nor S.Ct had authority over education Southern Manifesto – sovereignty of So. States. …”to resist forced integration by any lawful means”

  4. 1957 “Little Rock Nine” 101st airborne 1962 University of Mississippi Federal troops 1963 University of Alabama Civil Rights est. supremacy of federal law over states Rights – in area of education

  5. Modern Federalism New Deal…1930’s U.S. v. Darby Lumber Company…1941 (minimum wages /maximum hours for industries engaged in interstate commerce) S.Ct. stated that 10th not an independent source of states’ rights, but merely a truism Feds retain authority to “resort to all means for the Exercise of a granted power…adapted to the per- mitted end”. Court overturned Hammer – and greatly expanded Federal power under the Commerce Clause.

  6. Court Swings… 1976… National League of Cities v. Usery min wage/overtime does not apply to state/local gov. employees 5-4 1985…Garcia v. San Antonio Metro. Transit Authority overturned Usery 5-4 Dissenting opinions: “…effectively reduces 10th amendment to meaning- less rhetoric” “…relegates to the states the trivial role that Antifederalists feared they would occupy”

  7. RELATIONSHIP OF 9TH AND 10TH AMENDMENTS LIBERAL JUSTICES CONSERVATIVE JUS. 9TH as imp. Source of ind. Rights BUT are reluctant to enforce 10th as a source of states’ rights Insist on enforcing the10th as a guarantee states’ rights ag. Fed. Gov. BUT Dismisss the 9th protection of unenumerated rights

More Related