Federalism

federalism

a system of govt that divides power between the national and state govts

police powers

reserved to the states, allow the states to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people

concurrent powers

powers granted to both states and the federal government in the constitution

concurrent powers examples

levy taxes, borrow money, regulate banks and corporations, pass and enforce laws, operate court systems

Dillon’s rule

local jurisdictions are more restricted in their powers (“creatures of the states” - they exist at the states’ pleasure)

McCulloch v. Maryland Context

Second BOTUS. questions whether congress can charter national bank. several states (like MD) passed laws to tax the second bank. bank officials in maryland refused to pay the state tax

mcculloch v. maryland questions

did congress have the authority to establish a bank in the first place? did individual states have the authority to tax multiple branches of the bank within their borders?

mcculloch v maryland decision

supreme court favored national govt. the state and ppl cede some sovereignty to national govt in ratifying constitution. necessary and proper clause

marshall’s reasoning 1

right to establish the bank was a valid implied power of congress (not enumerated). this means congress isnt limited by its expressed powers. under necessary and proper clause, it has implied authority to take actions needed to carry out expressed powers

marshall’s reasoning 2

marshall and the court also found in favor of the national government when it came to being taxed by the states. (state govts have no right to tax the federal govt)

selective incorporation

the process through which the supreme court applies fundamental rights in the bill of rights to the states on a case-by-case basis. (14th amendment guarantees equal protection and due process for states). rights only apply to federal govt, and the court applies them to states over time

grant-in-aid

federal money provided to states to implement public policy objectives

fiscal federalism

the federal govt’s use of grants-in-aid to influence policies in the states

categorical grants

grants-in-aid provided to states with specific provisions on their use. may require that state or local authority provide matching funds, may be specific instructions on how funds are used, may be awarded based on population, need, income

categorical grants acceptance

not required from states. when they do, they accept the national regulations. once a state establishes a program based on this grant, it depends on future funds for existence

unfunded mandates

federal requirements that states must follow without being provided with funding

supporters of categorical grants 1

redistributing money between states can reduce inequality among the states

supporters of categorical grants 2

money provided by the national govt can help improve the lives of ppl living in these states that wouldnt have been possible w/o federal help

supporters of categorical grants 3

social welfare programs were under state control. programs like medicaid and the elementary and secondary education act have provided federal funding to low income families

anti-categorical grants

some see these efforts as overreaching by the national govt. nixon sought to return some power to the states

block grants

type of grant-in-aid that gives state officials more authority in the disbursement of federal funds

revenue sharing

when the fed govt apportions tax money to the states w/ no string attached

devolution

returning more authority to state or local govts (clinton signed the personal responsibility and work reconciliation act, devolving social welfare programs back to the states)

elementary and secondary education act

part of lbj’s great society. meant to provide greater educational opportunities, especially for students in low-income areas. gave fed grant money to states to create programs to reduce dropout rates and improve schools

no child left behind act

reauthorized the ESEA. controversial bc it gave grant money if the states agreed to standardized testing. this testing was criticized by many constituency groups

every student succeeds act

replaced NCLB in 2015. created more flexibility in setting educational standards but retained mandatory standardized testing.

supporters of state control over education argue…

the federal govt has overstepped boundaries with the assertion that education is traditionally a state issue

others argue…

students should not be educationally disadvantaged based upon the state they live in. educators, students, and parents are all caught in the middle

US vs. Lopez context

alfonso lopez, texas student, brought a gun to school to sell to another student. confronted and confessed, charged under texas state law. state charges were dropped, and he was charged with violating the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990

united states v. lopez

lopez wanted fed charges dropped bc the act was unconstitutional bc congress didnt have power to regulate public schools. lower courts denied the motion, saying these actions were covered under the GFSZA, as these institutions were related to interstate commerce. after being tried and convicted, lopez appealed and went to US court of appeals, which reversed the decision. US govt also appealed

gun-free school zones act

forbids individuals from knowingly carrying a gun in a school zone

us v. lopez question

is the 1990 GFSZA unconstitutional bc it exceeds the power of congress to legislate under the commerce clause?

us govt argument

guns in schools can lead to increase in crime, and that would impact national economy (crime is expensive, insurance rates could increase. businesses wouldnt want to relocate to high crime areas)

us v. lopez decision

5-4 decision. court upheld court of appeals. possession of a gun in a school zone didnt constitute an economic activity that would substantially affect interstate commerce. “slippery slope” argument - any activity could be commercial. reaffirms 10th amendment - state power is protected. reaffirms police powers

us v. lopez dissenting opinion

gun violence could have an influence over commerce + education (justice breyer). congress could have reasoned that guns in schools could undermine educational opportunities and impair commerce nationwide.