The Constitution's Federalism Foundations: Exploring Key Clauses

Federalism is a basic concept embodied in the US Constitution, which determines how power is divided between federal and state governments. The Tenth Amendment, for example, reserves powers to the states, as long as those powers are not delegated to the federal government. The federal government has limited powers, and Articles I, II, and III of the Constitution list the powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, respectively. The Supremacy Clause in Article VI establishes federal law as superior to state law. Federalism allows states the flexibility to implement policies and laws based on their particular needs and circumstances.

Explore related products

American Constitutional Law: Constitutional Structures: Separated Powers and Federalism (Volume 1)

$71.8 $72

The Federalist Papers (Signet Classics)

$7.23 $8.95

The Federalist Papers (Dover Thrift Editions: American History)

$6.46 $8

The Annotated Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth Part 1 (1901)

$67.95

The American Commonwealth: Two Volumes

$9.99 $20

The Annotated Constitution Of The Australian Commonwealth Part 2 (1901)

$47.95

The Supremacy Clause establishes federal law as superior to state law

Federalism is a basic concept embodied in the US Constitution, which refers to the division and sharing of power between the national and state governments. The Constitution outlines the powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the federal government in Articles I, II, and III, respectively.

The Supremacy Clause, outlined in Article VI, is one of the Constitution's most significant structural provisions. It establishes the Constitution and the laws of the United States made pursuant to it, as well as all treaties made or to be made under the authority of the United States, as the supreme law of the land. This clause explicitly states that the Constitution binds the judges in every state, regardless of any contrary state laws.

The Supremacy Clause addresses the issue of federal law being superior to state law, which was notably absent in the Articles of Confederation that previously governed the United States. The absence of such a provision during the Confederation era meant that federal statutes did not bind state courts unless implemented by state legislation. The Supremacy Clause was included in the Constitution, ratified in 1788, to address this issue and related political difficulties.

The Supreme Court has relied on the Supremacy Clause to uphold federal law over conflicting state laws, particularly in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. This principle, known as federal preemption, is the most common constitutional ground for judicially invalidating state laws. The Court has also applied the Supremacy Clause in ways that reinforce dual federalism, a doctrine that emphasizes distinct and non-overlapping zones of constitutional authority for the federal and state governments.

In modern times, the Supreme Court continues to interpret and apply the Supremacy Clause in cases involving potential conflicts between federal statutes and state laws. These cases often involve complex questions of statutory interpretation and the extent of Congressional power.

The Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the states

The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, passed by Congress on September 25, 1789, and ratified on December 15, 1791, reserves powers to the states. It specifies that any powers not explicitly granted to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved for state governments. This amendment reinforces the idea of federalism, which is the division and sharing of power between the national and state governments.

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." In other words, if the Constitution does not list a specific power as belonging to the federal government, it is a power reserved for the states. This includes powers such as creating school systems, overseeing state courts, managing public safety, and regulating local governments and businesses within their borders.

The Tenth Amendment was intended to confirm that the federal government had limited powers and that the states retained a sphere of autonomy. This amendment clarifies that the Constitution enumerates all the powers of the federal government, including those of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. By reserving powers to the states, the Tenth Amendment helps maintain a balance of power between the federal and state governments.

The police powers granted to the states under the Tenth Amendment allow them to implement policies and laws based on their specific needs and circumstances. This flexibility is considered a feature of the Founders' federalist design, allowing for democratic diversity and accountability of local governments. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of federalism, as states were able to combat the virus using methods they deemed appropriate, demonstrating the continued relevance of federalism in modern times.

The Necessary and Proper Clause gives Congress power to make laws

Federalism in the US Constitution establishes the division and sharing of power between the national and state governments. The Constitution grants the federal government certain powers, while the Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the states, including creating school systems, overseeing state courts, and managing local governments.

The Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the Sweeping Clause, Elastic Clause, Coefficient Clause, or Basket Clause, is a provision in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. This clause grants Congress the power to "make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." In other words, it allows Congress to use all means "necessary and proper" to execute the powers expressly listed in Article I.

The Necessary and Proper Clause has been interpreted to give Congress implied powers in addition to its enumerated powers. For example, in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), the Supreme Court unanimously held that Congress has the implied power to establish a bank, as it is a "proper and suitable instrument" to aid the government in carrying out its powers. This case set a precedent for interpreting the Necessary and Proper Clause, with Chief Justice John Marshall's opinion reverberating to this day.

The Necessary and Proper Clause has been invoked in various contexts, such as in United States v. Comstock (2010), where the Court considered whether Congress's power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce included the power to civilly commit federal prisoners after their criminal sentences had expired. Additionally, the Necessary and Proper Clause has been used to justify Congress's power to create, define, and punish crimes and offenses when necessary to effectuate the objectives of the federal government, even in areas not expressly mentioned in Article I, such as the power to punish the alteration of registered bonds and the impersonation of a federal officer.

The Necessary and Proper Clause is a crucial component of the US Constitution, providing Congress with the flexibility to enact legislation necessary to execute the powers vested in the federal government. It ensures that Congress can adapt to changing circumstances and effectively carry out its responsibilities.

Explore related products

American Constitutional Law, Volume I: The Structure of Government

$98.8 $130

Hart and Wechsler's The Federal Courts and the Federal System (University Casebook Series)

$305

Hart and Wechsler's The Federal Courts and the Federal System (University Casebook Series)

$305

Constitutional Law: Structure and Rights in Our Federal System, Eighth Edition

$169 $225

Federal Reserve System: Its Origin and Growth: 1930, Volume 1 - Scholar's Choice Edition

$44.44

Federal Court Basics: The Structure and Function of Federal and State Courts

$11.95

The police powers allow states to implement policies and laws

Federalism, as outlined in the US Constitution, establishes the division of power between the federal and state governments. The Constitution grants the federal government certain powers, while the Tenth Amendment ensures that states retain powers not delegated to the federal government.

Police powers are a key aspect of this division of powers, allowing states to implement policies and laws to address specific needs and circumstances. These powers are distinct from the police as law enforcement officers, instead referring to the broad regulatory power of the government. States can enact and enforce laws and regulations through their legislative and executive branches, provided they do not infringe upon the US Constitution or state constitutions, and are not unreasonably arbitrary or oppressive.

The flexibility afforded by police powers enables states to respond to emergencies and unique situations, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, by implementing tailored policies. For example, in the 2019 California Supreme Court case, T-Mobile, LLC v. City and County of San Francisco, the state's police power was recognised to include "broad authority to determine, for purposes of public health, safety, and welfare, the appropriate uses of land".

The police powers of states also extend to land-use planning authority, which is typically delegated to local governments, such as counties and municipalities. This authority allows states to regulate land use for the public health, safety, and welfare of their citizens.

The division of police powers between the federal and state governments is a fundamental aspect of federalism, allowing states to establish their own laws and policies while ensuring that the federal government's powers are limited to those granted by the Constitution.

The Eleventh Amendment immunises states from some federal lawsuits

Federalism in the US Constitution determines how power is divided between federal and state governments. The Constitution lists the powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, with the legislative branch, i.e., Congress, having the lawmaking powers.

The Eleventh Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits federal courts from hearing certain lawsuits against states. The Amendment has been interpreted to mean that state courts do not have to hear certain suits against a state if those suits are based on federal law. The Eleventh Amendment's plain language does not bar a private citizen from suing their own state in federal court. However, the Supreme Court has consistently interpreted the Amendment to bar private citizens from filing lawsuits against a state unless the state consents to the lawsuit. This includes lawsuits against state officials, such as a governor, and lawsuits against a state by its own citizens or citizens of another state.

There are exceptions to this general rule. A state may consent to a private lawsuit in federal court, and Congress may also abrogate a state's sovereign immunity. If Congress passes a law or act authorizing the lawsuit, it can go forward. If a state voluntarily agrees to the removal of a state action to federal court, it cannot then invoke a defence of sovereign immunity. A state may also expressly consent to being sued in federal court by statute, but this is not lightly inferred, and the Court strictly construes statutes alleged to consent to the suit.

The Eleventh Amendment came about due to the Supreme Court's decision in Chisholm v. Georgia (1793). In this case, a citizen of South Carolina sued Georgia for unpaid debts incurred during the Revolutionary War/War of Independence. Georgia claimed that federal courts were not allowed to hear suits against states and refused to appear before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that the lawsuit could proceed, relying on the text of Article III, which explained that "between" encompasses suits "by" and "against" a state. Alarmed by the Supreme Court's decision, Senator Caleb Strong of Massachusetts quickly proposed an amendment that ultimately became the Eleventh Amendment.

Frequently asked questions