The Constitution: Dividing Powers, Uniting The Nation

The US Constitution delegates powers to the nation in a variety of ways, including through express grants of authority to Congress and the President, as well as through implied powers. The Tenth Amendment, ratified in 1791, grants state governments all powers not specifically delegated to the federal government, shaping the dynamic between federal and state authorities. The Constitution also enables Congress to delegate power to administrative agencies, determining excessive profits during wartime, regulating broadcast licensing, and more. The nondelegation doctrine, derived from separation of powers and due process principles, prevents the lawmaking branch from transferring its legislative power to the executive or judicial branches, though it allows for conferral of authority to the executive branch. The delegation of powers in foreign affairs differs, with the President having greater freedom from constitutional constraints when acting in this domain. The Constitution's delegation of powers aims to balance federal and state authority, addressing representation, political power concentration, and stability.

Explore related products

Power Without Responsibility: How Congress Abuses the People Through Delegation

$25.87 $38

The Constitution of Conflict: How the Supreme Court Undermines the Separation of Powers (Constitutional Thinking)

$52.24 $54.99

The Chevron Doctrine: Its Rise and Fall, and the Future of the Administrative State

$22.62 $36

Constitutional Powers of Florida's State and Local Governments

$135.8

Law and Leviathan: Redeeming the Administrative State

$19.95 $14.95

Delegation of Governmental Power to Private Parties: A Comparative Perspective

$185 $195

The Tenth Amendment outlines powers reserved for states

The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1791, is a brief but significant part of the Bill of Rights. It outlines the powers reserved for state governments, specifically those not explicitly granted to the federal government by the Constitution. This amendment clarifies the power dynamic between the federal and state governments, emphasising that the federal government's authority is limited to the powers explicitly listed in the Constitution.

The Tenth Amendment states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This means that any powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are left to the states or the people to decide. This amendment was intended to confirm the federal government's limited nature and prevent it from overreaching its authority.

The amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court, which held that Congress could regulate activities significantly affecting interstate commerce. This interpretation expanded Congress's powers under the commerce clause. However, the Tenth Amendment also limits Congress's reach by prohibiting it from acting beyond its enumerated powers. For example, states cannot tax federal institutions.

The Tenth Amendment reserves powers for state governments, maintaining a balance of power between federal and state authorities. This federalism allows states the freedom to experiment with different ideas and programmes, earning them the nickname "laboratories of democracy". The amendment also reinforces that the Bill of Rights does not enumerate all possible rights of the people, leaving room for unenumerated rights to be recognised.

Congress can regulate activities impacting interstate commerce

The Commerce Clause, outlined in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the US Constitution, grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the states, and with Indian tribes. This clause has been interpreted and re-interpreted over time, with courts generally taking a broad view of the powers it grants to Congress.

In 1824, the Supreme Court ruled in Gibbons v. Ogden that intrastate activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause, as long as it was part of a larger interstate commercial scheme. This set a precedent for a broad interpretation of the clause, which was further expanded in 1905 in Swift and Company v. United States. The Court ruled that Congress had the authority to regulate local commerce, provided that it could become part of a continuous "current" of commerce involving the interstate movement of goods and services.

The Supreme Court briefly narrowed its interpretation of the Commerce Clause during the Lochner era (1905-1937), experimenting with the idea that Congress could not pass laws impeding an individual's right to enter a business contract. However, this was short-lived, and in NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp (1937), the Court began to recognise broader grounds for using the Commerce Clause to regulate state activity.

In United States v. Lopez (1995), the Supreme Court attempted to curtail Congress's broad legislative mandate under the Commerce Clause, holding that Congress could only regulate the channels of commerce, the instrumentalities of commerce, and actions that substantially affect interstate commerce. This was further clarified in United States v. Sullivan (1948), where the Court upheld Congress's power to "keep the channels of such commerce free from the transportation of illicit or harmful articles".

In more recent cases, such as Gonzales v. Raich (2005), the Court held that even non-economic activity could be regulated if it was part of a larger regulatory scheme that clearly regulated interstate commerce. This was further supported in NFIB v. Sebelius (2012), where a majority of justices found that Congress could regulate non-economic local activity if it was necessary for regulating interstate commerce.

In summary, the Commerce Clause grants Congress significant power to regulate activities that impact interstate commerce. While interpretations of the clause have varied over time, the overall trend has been towards a broader interpretation, allowing Congress to address a wide range of issues, from civil rights and workplace safety to drug safety and employee rights.

The President has more freedom in foreign affairs

The US Constitution outlines that the President has the power to receive and appoint ambassadors, as well as make treaties with the consent of the Senate. This is supported by Justice Joseph Story, who commented that if the executive branch, headed by the President, receives an ambassador, it is an acknowledgment of the sovereign authority of a new nation.

The President's power in foreign affairs has been a topic of debate since the early days of the Republic. In the Pacificus-Helvidius Debates, Hamilton argued that the executive power of the nation is vested in the President, and that the legislative and judiciary departments are not the organs of intercourse between the US and foreign nations.

The Supreme Court's decision in Zivotofsky v. Kerry in 2015 considered the constitutionality of a law enacted by Congress that instructed the State Department to designate the place of birth on a passport as "Jerusalem, Israel". This case established that the recognition power belongs exclusively to the President, but its relevance to other foreign affairs issues remains unclear.

In Loving v. United States, the Court found that Congress had delegated authority over the death penalty provisions of military law to the President, and that the President, as Commander-in-Chief, had the responsibility to superintend the military. The Court also noted that familiar limitations on delegation do not apply when the entity exercising delegated authority possesses independent authority over the subject matter.

The Justice Department has also asserted that the Trump administration's curtailment of the US Agency of International Development (USAID)'s funding falls under the foreign affairs powers granted to the President by the Constitution. Acting Solicitor General Sarah M. Harris argued that the request to resume USAID payments "intrudes on the prerogatives of the Executive Branch," and that the President's power is at its apex in matters of foreign affairs.

Explore related products

The Constitution of Ireland: A Contextual Analysis (Constitutional Systems of the World)

$32.35 $35.95

The Politics of Delegation

$58.89 $61.99

Representative Democracy in Flux: Deconstructive Narratives from a Legal and Constitutional Perspective (Routledge Research in Constitutional Law)

$42.74 $56.99

The Administrative State Before the Supreme Court: Perspectives on the Nondelegation Doctrine

$77.52 $110

Congressional Ambivalence: The Political Burdens of Constitutional Authority

$57 $60

Rulemaking by the European Commission: The New System for Delegation of Powers

$100.99 $140

The Constitution grants powers to Congress and the President

The US Constitution grants powers to Congress and the President in the form of legislative and executive powers, respectively. The legislative branch, comprising the Senate and the House of Representatives, holds the power to make laws and decide on matters such as taxation, commerce, and national defence. Meanwhile, the executive branch, led by the President, is responsible for enforcing these laws and has the power to grant pardons, make treaties, and act as the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.

The Constitution outlines specific powers for Congress, including the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; to borrow money on behalf of the country; to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the states; and to establish uniform rules for naturalization and bankruptcy proceedings. Additionally, Congress has the authority to make laws and alter regulations regarding the election of Senators and Representatives, with certain exceptions.

The President, as the head of the executive branch, has the power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. The President is also responsible for appointing ambassadors, ministers, and consuls, as well as nominating and appointing federal officers with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President serves as the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, Navy, and Militia, and has the power to convene both Houses of Congress on extraordinary occasions.

While the Constitution primarily grants powers to Congress and the President, it also reserves certain powers for the states. The Tenth Amendment specifies that any powers not explicitly granted to the federal government are reserved for state and local governments. This amendment ensures a balance of power between the federal and state authorities, limiting the federal government to only those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in interpreting and expanding the powers of Congress and the President. For example, in the case of McCulloch v. Maryland, the Court held that the federal government had the power to charter a national bank, even though it was not explicitly listed in the Constitution. Similarly, in Jones & Laughlin Steel, the Court expanded Congress's commerce powers, allowing it to regulate activities within states that significantly affect interstate commerce. These interpretations by the Supreme Court have shaped the dynamic between federal and state authorities and influenced the scope of powers delegated by the Constitution.

Federalism: a system in which power is shared between federal and state governments

Federalism is a system of government in which power is shared between a central federal government and individual state governments. The US Constitution, drafted in 1787, outlines a federalist system that divides powers between the federal and state governments, with each having their own distinct roles and responsibilities.

The Constitution grants specific powers to the federal government, such as the power to charter a national bank, regulate interstate commerce, and conduct foreign relations. These powers are listed in Article I, Section 8, and Article II, Sections 2 and 3. The federal government also has implied powers that are not explicitly stated but are inferred.

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1791, reserves powers not explicitly granted to the federal government for the states. This amendment ensures that the federal government's authority is limited to the powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution, while the states retain all other powers. This amendment was designed to protect states' rights and prevent the federal government from overreaching its authority.

State governments have their own constitutions and laws, and they are responsible for a range of issues, including those not specifically delegated to the federal government, such as education, healthcare, and local law enforcement. States also have the power to tax their citizens and pass laws within their jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in interpreting the Constitution and resolving disputes between the federal and state governments. For example, in the case of McCulloch v. Maryland, the Supreme Court upheld the federal government's power to charter a national bank, even though it was not specifically listed as one of its powers. The Court has also ruled on the application of Constitutional rights and protections against state governments, providing federal protection to citizens from potential violations by state and local governments.

Frequently asked questions