Doctrine Of Preemption And Federal Law

Review Questions for Mid-Term 1) What constitutional clause allows laws enacted by the federal government to take priority over conflicting state laws?

Since there is no text in the Constitution that states this the claims must be made by historical understanding and practice of the text. The people who are against this argue that in recent years that there has not been any precedent that relates to this kind of action. However they disagree with that and state there in fact has been the earliest congress had acts that also required state officials to participate in the enforcement of federal laws. They were doing so however since they did not know that power existed. The assumption that the federal government can command the state's executive power in the absence of a constitutional authorization is not indicated it is the opposite of that actually. Including that it has been around since the earlier is not true that there is some protection that the states have against this keeping their duty to keep their goals. The early legislation also has sources that indicate the original understanding of the Constitution. Alos that though they could and may be needed to regulate commerce they way the act was set up was not within its power to do so. They stayed with the old principle that states are not required to enforce it since state legislature is not required to follow or are a subject to federal direction. There is also a separation of powers that a state has and powers that the government

“Federalism, central to the constitutional design, adopts the principle that both the National and State Governments have elements of sovereignty the other is bound to respect.” Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 2500 (2012). The Supremacy Clause provides a clear rule that federal law “shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Art. VI, cl. 2. Under this standard, Congress has the power to preempt state law. Arizona, 132 S. Ct. at 2495; Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council, 530 U.S. 363, 372 (2000); Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 210–211 (1824). However, it is assumed that historic State police powers are not superseded “unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.” Arizona, 132 S. Ct. at 2501; Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. 218, 230 (1947).

The United States government operates under a federalist system meaning that there are two or more governments who share the same power over one geographic region. In this case it would be the state and federal governments. The 10th amendment of the U.S. Constitution summarizes the idea of federalism, stating that “The powers not delegated to the US by the Constitution, nor prohibited by the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people” (U.S. Constitution). This means that the federal government, whose jurisdiction is very limited, has jurisdiction over some thing while the state government has jurisdiction over

The Commerce Clause grants Congress the power “[t]o regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” Despite its silence as to the effect of that affirmative power, federal courts have recognized the Framers’ wish to create a unified national market and have found a dormant congressional authority in it. Since the landmark case of Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), that dormant authority has limited state regulations that burden interstate commerce, even in the absence of congressional regulation. Congress has the power only to restrict the scope of permissible state regulation but it does not absolutely preclude states from affecting commerce. "[T]he states retain authority under their police powers to regulate matters of 'legitimate local concern', even though interstate commerce may be affected." A challenged statute is upheld if its effect on interstate commerce is merely incidental. On the other hand, a state regulation that is facially or practically discriminatory will be defeated unless it shows a legitimate local purpose that cannot be accomplished by any less discriminatory alternatives.

3b. Which amendment states that the powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states?

a. Supremacy Law- “ The constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in the pursuance thereof... shall be the supreme law of the land.”

The California and Federal judicial systems are very similar in how they are designed and how they function. California state courts are established and primarily obtain their power from the California State Constitution. This is similar to federal judicial system in that federal courts derive their power from the United States Constitution. The following paper will compare and contrast the extreme similarities between both judicial systems as well as some of the distinct differences.

In conclusion, state law and federal law are very similar as, they are each meant to dictate a measure of safety for the citizens of the United States of America. According to the United States Constitution federal law, which is dictated, allows the federal government the power to make laws for the people and for the country as a whole. State laws are meant to allow each state to be allowed to govern them and handle the issues within their states. This power was given to them from the Bill of Rights that was also outlined in the Constitution (FindLaw, 2012).

Express preemption occurs when Congress expressly states that a federal law intends to preempt certain state legislations. Congress explicitly provides that federal law

Article VI, Clause 2 (National Supremacy Clause) – The Federal Government, in expressing any of the powers

“the federal judiciary requiring the states and/or localities to adhere to certain policies” (p. 151.)

In the United States Constitution it is stated that “No single section of the constitution deals with federalism. Instead, the provisions dividing power between the states and the national government appear throughout the constitution. Most of the constitution is concerned with establishing the powers of the national government. National power is also based on the supremacy clause of article VI, which says that the constitution and laws made in accordance with it are “the supreme law of the land”. This means that when national and state laws conflict, the national laws will be followed. Article I, section 9 limits the power of the national government over individuals. The tenth amendment the constitution also limits the state powers in Article I, section10 and denies the states certain powers” (Keeping the

The US Constitution defines the federal government as “The Supreme Law of the land”, known as the Supremacy Clause. Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution states that, should the federal government exercise their rights enumerated in the Constitution, they would prevail over any conflicting state implementation of power. The clause ensures that the federal laws take precedence over state laws and ensures that state judges uphold these laws. The Supremacy Clause checks the power of the local governments by

Though the Federal and State Government are reflections of each other, when Federal laws are