Study sets, textbooks, questions
Upgrade to remove ads
The Tenth Amendment and State Sovereignty
Terms in this set (20)
Traditional Government Functions
Education, Public Works, Law Enforcement, Parks and Recreation
The concept that states are in complete and exclusive control of all the people and property within their territory.
Term Limits v. Thornton - Background
On November 3, 1992, Arkansas voters adopted Amendment 73 to their State Constitution. The "Term Limitation Amendment," in addition to limiting terms of elected officials within the Arkansas state government, also provided that any person who served three or more terms as a member of the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas would be ineligible for re-election as a US Representative from Arkansas. Similarly, the Amendment provided that any person who served two or more terms as a member of the United States Senate from Arkansas would be ineligible for re-election as a US Senator from Arkansas.
Term Limits v. Thornton - Question
Can states alter those qualifications for the U.S. Congress that are specifically enumerated in the Constitution?
Term Limits v. Thornton - Decision
The Constitution prohibits States from adopting Congressional qualifications in addition to those enumerated in the Constitution. A state congressional term limits amendment is unconstitutional if it has the likely effect of handicapping a class of candidates and "has the sole purpose of creating additional qualifications indirectly." Furthermore, "...allowing individual States to craft their own congressional qualifications would erode the structure designed by the Framers to form a 'more perfect Union.'"
McCulloch v. Maryland - Background
In 1816, Congress chartered The Second Bank of the United States. In 1818, the state of Maryland passed legislation to impose taxes on the bank. James W. McCulloch, the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the bank, refused to pay the tax.
McCulloch v. Maryland - Question
(1) Did Congress have the authority to establish the bank?
(2) Did the Maryland law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers?
McCulloch v. Maryland - Decision
In a unanimous decision, the Court held that Congress had the power to incorporate the bank and that Maryland could not tax instruments of the national government employed in the execution of constitutional powers. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Marshall noted that Congress possessed unenumerated powers not explicitly outlined in the Constitution. Marshall also held that while the states retained the power of taxation, "the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof are supreme. . .they control the Constitution and laws of the respective states, and cannot be controlled by them."
Scott v. Sandford - Background
Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri. From 1833 to 1843, he resided in Illinois (a free state) and in an area of the Louisiana Territory, where slavery was forbidden by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. After returning to Missouri, Scott sued unsuccessfully in the Missouri courts for his freedom, claiming that his residence in free territory made him a free man. Scott then brought a new suit in federal court. Scott's master maintained that no pure-blooded Negro of African descent and the descendant of slaves could be a citizen in the sense of Article III of the Constitution.
Scott v. Sandford - Question
Was Dred Scott free or slave?
Scott v. Sandford - Decision
Dred Scott was a slave. Under Articles III and IV, argued Taney, no one but a citizen of the United States could be a citizen of a state, and that only Congress could confer national citizenship. Taney reached the conclusion that no person descended from an American slave had ever been a citizen for Article III purposes. The Court then held the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, hoping to end the slavery question once and for all.
Garcia v. San Antonio Metro Transit Authority - Background
The San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (SAMTA), the main provider of transportation in the San Antonio metropolitan area, claimed it was exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. SAMTA argued that it was providing a "traditional" governmental function, which exempted it from federal controls according to the doctrine of federalism established in National League of Cities v. Usery (1976). Joe G. Garcia, an employee of SAMTA, brought suit for overtime pay under Fair Labor Standards Act.
Garcia v. San Antonio Metro Transit Authority - Question
Did principles of federalism make the San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority immune from the Fair Labor Standards Act?
Garcia v. San Antonio Metro Transit Authority - Decision
In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that the guiding principles of federalism established in National League of Cities v. Usery were unworkable and that SAMTA was subject to Congressional legislation under the Commerce Clause. The Court found that rules based on the subjective determination of "integral" or "traditional" governmental functions provided little or no guidance in determining the boundaries of federal and state power. The Court argued that the structure of the federal system itself, rather than any "discrete limitations" on federal authority, protected state sovereignty.
New York v. U.S. - Background
The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Act Amendments of 1985 required states alone or in compacts with other states to dispose of such radioactive waste within their borders. New York State and Allegany and Cortland counties were frustrated in their compliance efforts by resistance from residents to proposed radioactive waste sites and a lack of cooperation from neighboring states. New York filed suit against the federal government, questioning the authority of Congress to regulate state waste management.
New York v. U.S. - Question
Does the Low-Level Waste Act violate the Tenth Amendment and the "guarantee clause" of Article Four?
New York v. U.S. - Decision
In a 6-3 decision, the Court upheld two of the three provisions of the Act under review, reasoning that Congress had the authority under the Commerce Clause to use financial rewards and access to disposal sites as incentives for state waste management. The third provision, the "take-title" qualification, stipulated that states must take legal ownership and liability for low-level waste or by the regulatory act. "Either type of federal action," wrote Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, "would 'commandeer' state governments into the service of federal regulatory purposes, and would for this reason be inconsistent with the Constitution's division of authority between federal and state governments." This last provision violated the Tenth Amendment.
Printz v. U.S. - Background
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Bill) required "local chief law enforcement officers" (CLEOs) to perform background-checks on prospective handgun purchasers, until such time as the Attorney General establishes a federal system for this purpose. County sheriffs Jay Printz and Richard Mack, separately challenged the constitutionality of this interim provision of the Brady Bill on behalf of CLEOs in Montana and Arizona respectively. In both cases District Courts found the background-checks unconstitutional, but ruled that since this requirement was severable from the rest of the Brady Bill a voluntary background-check system could remain. On appeal from the Ninth Circuit's ruling that the interim background-check provisions were constitutional, the Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the two cases deciding this one along with Mack v. United States.
Printz v. U.S. - Question
Using the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I as justification, can Congress temporarily require state CLEOs to regulate handgun purchases by performing those duties called for by the Brady Bill's handgun applicant background-checks?
Printz v. U.S. - Decision
The Court constructed its opinion on the old principle that state legislatures are not subject to federal direction. The Court explained that while Congress may require the federal government to regulate commerce directly, in this case by performing background-checks on applicants for handgun ownership, the Necessary and Proper Clause does not empower it to compel state CLEOs to fulfill its federal tasks for it - even temporarily. The Court added that the Brady Bill could not require CLEOs to perform the related tasks of disposing of handgun-application forms or notifying certain applicants of the reasons for their refusal in writing, since the Brady Bill reserved such duties only for those CLEO's who voluntarily accepted them.
Sets with similar terms
Constitution Class Court Cases
Federalism Court Cases
POSC 419 Test #2
Sets found in the same folder
Presidential Emergency Powers
Presidential Power over Foreign Affairs
Congressional Power and Delegation
Other sets by this creator
Political Parties Final Exam
Taxing and Spending Clause
Under what circumstances do you think presidential candidates might refuse public funding in a general election?
Examine Impacts on Founding Documents Examine debates and compromises that impacted the creation of the founding documents and analyze historical conflicts over the respective roles of national and state governments. Examine which issues caused the most debate during the creation of the Articles of Confederation, and the compromises that resulted. Write a paragraph that summarizes the issues under debate and explain how "a firm league of friendship" was eventually established among the States. Consider such things as: the different roles of the national and state governments in the new nation and the ratification of the Articles of Confederation. In your paragraph, explain how the debates led to compromises and how these events impacted one founding document.
Why might government favor development? Why might government oppose development?
Why were the Federalist, Democratic-Republican, Democratic, and Republican parties created?
Recommended textbook solutions
Criminal Justice in America
Christina Dejong, Christopher E. Smith, George F Cole
Government in America: Elections and Updates Edition
George C. Edwards III, Martin P. Wattenberg, Robert L. Lineberry
Michael D. Reisig, Todd R. Clear
Other Quizlet sets
R part 2