high court interpretations of altering the constitution

Spence v Qld 2019

Cooperative, limiting the federal power over state decisions, as the high court recognises the states' powers and the role they play within the commonwealth regarding state elections.

Section 51xxxvi

Limiting what the parliament can do regarding federal elections. Worked along with s10 and s31, allowing state laws to govern federal elections.

Section 10

Allows for state laws to govern the senate elections.

Section 31

Allows for state laws to govern the house of representatives elections.

Palmer v wa 2021

Cooperative, upholding the state's ability to make laws regarding public health.

Section 92

Stating that trade and commerce between states should be completely free.

Vanderstock v Victoria 2023

Coercive, broadened the definition of what an excise was and allowed the parliament to interpret excise as they see fit.

Section 90

Gives federal government the ability to make all laws over taxes customs and excise.

Commonwealth v Tasmania 1983

Coercive, allowed for Australia to make laws when Australia enters an international treaty.

Section 51xxix

Gives the federal government the rights to make laws on external affairs and use treaties to legislate on issues.

Engineers v Adelaide 1920

Coercive as the power of implied immunity was part of the government's abilities as part of conciliation and arbitration.

Section 51xxxv

Reserve powers doctrine ruling that federal powers should be interpreted broadly under the corporations power.

Ha v nsw 1997

Coercive, allowed for a larger concentration of power by the federal parliament with regards to money and taxation.