StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

State Laws versus National supremacy - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
This paper is aimed at providing a comparative study of State Laws versus National supremacy. From this research, it is clear that this debate has continued over time and most likely, it will push forward with every new form of administration…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER99% of users find it useful
State Laws versus National supremacy
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "State Laws versus National supremacy"

State Laws versus National supremacy Federalism is a structure of government with one central government and other smaller units such as states in the United States of America. It is a system of government in which the sovereignty is sub divided into the central government and other constituent units such as provinces or states (Wilson, 2008). State rights refer to the political supremacy set aside for the American state governments other than the federal government in line with the American Constitution. Supremacy Clause is available in Article six of the American national constitution. It states that federal treaties and statutes form the supreme laws of the land and provides that these are the supreme and highest forms of law in the legal system of U.S. and mandates that all state statutes must follow the Federal law whenever a conflict occurs between the state law and federal law (Wilson, 2008). The architects of the New Federalism, a program that permitted states to decisions concerning local issues, were George Bush and Ronald Reagan. For 200 years, the relationship between the two governments has shifted more towards the national supremacy, though several observers today believe that the power balance is beginning to stretch out back to the states. One major sign that the national government was growing in the 1960s was the great number of categorical grants that existed during that time (Luca, Miroff, Seidelman, Swanstrom, 2009). There has been a debate on power distribution between the national government and the U.S. States began as early as 1787 with the founding of the Republic and continues up to today. This debate was firstly brought about because of division of powers between the federalists and anti-federalists. The Federalists were in support for a strong national government and a relatively weaker state government as well as separation of powers between the two governments. The Anti-federalists supported strong state governments with the fear that the government could threaten people’s rights (Wilson, 2008). Most recently, with the introduction of the Republican government, the republicans brought about an effort to slow down the growth and development of the Federal government by returning most of the functional units back to the state. This process was referred to as the Devolution Revolution. However, the Supreme Court of the U.S has continued to make decisions concerning the relationship between the federal government and the state government and acting as an intermediary in cases of conflicts between the two governments. The Supreme Court makes decisions that have a big impact on the powers of the two (Luca, Miroff, Seidelman, Swanstrom, 2009). In most cases, the political process makes the final decision on how powers are divided between the state and national governments but most recently, the Supreme Court, has risen as the final say over the debate concerning what each level should do, to whom and for whom. This role was claimed by the Supreme Court out of the outcome of the case between McCulloch v. Maryland where the state of Maryland levied a tax against a certain bank, Baltimore branch in the United States and was then challenged and disputed in court by one James McCulloch. James McCulloch was a cashier at the bank and declined to pay the tax levied against the bank and gave a reason that a state is not allowed by the law tax an instrument that belongs to the national government. Chief Justice, John Marshall who was deciding over the case decided to set forth the canon of National Supremacy which states that in the event of a case occurring between the constitutionally approved actions of the National government and those of the local or state government, then the actions of the Federal government are supreme and thus prevails. This decision dealt a big blow to the Supreme Court to a claim of state rights by declining an attempt by the states to get in the way of a legitimate Federal activity (Luca, Miroff, Seidelman, Swanstrom, 2009). When Richard Nixon was elected the president back in 1969, he started supporting a revenue sharing plan that directed federal money back to the states, but this was not accompanied by the categorical grants. Today, the same issue of the proper balance between the state and national powers still exists and is feasible as it was back in 1789 (Luca, Miroff, Seidelman, Swanstrom, 2009). This issue has remained a controversial subject for more than 200 years and Americans are divided on what laws belong to the federal or national government and the ones that should be reserved for the States. Several questions shape the current debate over federal and state power. They include, should the subject of abortion be regulated by states or should the Federal government set a uniform law on the same? Should states consider allowing doctor-assisted suicide? Should individual states allow the use of Marijuana to cure diseases or is the whole drug policy supposed to be left in the hands of the Federal government (Zimmerman, 2008)? A very good example of how the debate has been so vibrant is the issue of the Civil War. The Civil war was fought as a result of whether states should have the right to defend the establishment of slavery. During the aftermath of the war, the endorsement of the 14th Amendment imposed critical restriction on the state rights to control the lives of people within its jurisdiction. However, during the 20th and 21st centuries, the Supreme Court turned again to overturn the rights of speakers, gun owners, and criminal defendants, and private property owners, members of racial and ethnic minorities among others. Today, cases that concern the rights of states against the federal government, are always decided by the Supreme Court (Zimmerman, 2008). Many state laws have been passed at the expense of the Federal government but the question which arises is; are such state laws legal and constitutional? For instance, The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), is supposed to regulate the all cases of immigration such as to curtail illegal migration, denying benefits to fake immigrants among others. This should be done constitutionally at the federal level. The Supreme Court overruled any attempt by the state government to deal with immigration cases. However, many states have defied the constitution. In the contemporary world, people have engaged in passing legislations that limit immigrants without proper documents access to public benefits as well as other legislations that affect the immigrants (Wilson, 2008).They cite lack of federal enforcement and security reasons as the main reasons they defy the constitution and act on behalf of the National government. This has caused a bigger debate and conflicts between the two governments. On many occasions, the Federal government has challenged a number of these laws through litigation cases. The debate of state rights versus national supremacy has undergone several changes up to today. The approval of the constitution established a union of states under the Federal government. This issue of creating the states instigated a very considerable debate from political analysts as well as from the citizens: What is the nature of the states? What kind of privileges, powers, duties and responsibilities does the constitution give to the Federal government as well as to the states and people? Over the past 200 years, the two issues have been debated overtime and have shaped the nation’s social, political and economic growth and development. The debate has undergone several changes (Luca, Miroff, Seidelman, Swanstrom, 2009): At the period of the pre-federalism, the country started a war for independence and began a confederation type of government that generated a group of sovereign states. Since there were many deficiencies in the provisions of the confederation, a new constitution was ratified creating of a full national government and states. Just soon after the adoption of the constitution, issues about sovereignty and the supremacy of the two forms of government were debated and this ultimately led to the Civil war (Wilson, 2008). The period between 1789 and 1901, which was termed as the Dual Federalism era, was characterized by very little cooperation and collaboration within state and federal governments. The two governments were fighting each other. The period between 1901 and 1960 was referred to as the Cooperative Federalism, which was characterized by strong collaboration between the two governments. This period was marked by the authorization of the national income tax together with the system of grant-in-aid in response to the many social and economic issues which were facing the nation at that time (Luca, Miroff, Seidelman, Swanstrom, 2009). The period between 1960 and 1968 was referred to as Creative Federalism and was orchestrated by the then president Lyndon Johnson. This program was termed by many scholars as an exodus from the past. It revised the power relationship between the two government levels and more power was shifted to the national government by increasing use of regulations and the extension of grant-in-aid system. The period from 1970 to date has been termed as the Contemporary federalism and has been portrayed by changes in the inter-governmental grant system, issues about federal regulations as well as continued disputes over the nature and type of the system of federalism (Zimmerman, 2008). During the time of George W. Bush as the president, the federal government was mostly concerned with issues like war and terrorism, but under the current administration of President Barrack Obama, things have started to shift. He has been involved nearly in every major domestic issue whereby he makes policies and leaves them to the states to implement them. For instance issues of immigration and climate change (Zimmerman, 2008). In conclusion, this debate has continued overtime and most likely, it will push forward with every new form of administration. States have continued violating the Federal law. For example, in 2014, voters from the states of Colorado and Washington voted and legalized marijuana in their states but the constitution states that marijuana is illegal under federal law. This will continue causing debates and conflicts within state and national government. References Luca, T., Miroff, B., Seidelman, R., & Swanstrom, T. (2009). The Democartic Debate: American Politics in an Age of Change. Boston: Cengage Learning. Wilson, W. (2008). Constitutional Government in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Wilson Press. Zimmerman, J., F. (2008): Contemporary American Federalism: The Growth of National Power, Second Edition. New York: SUNY Press. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“State Laws versus National supremacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words”, n.d.)
State Laws versus National supremacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words. Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/social-science/1666245-an-interesting-aspect-of-american-politics-concerns-the-ways-in-which-political-conflicts-have-been-transformed-into-constitutional-struggles-over-federalism
(State Laws Versus National Supremacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words)
State Laws Versus National Supremacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words. https://studentshare.org/social-science/1666245-an-interesting-aspect-of-american-politics-concerns-the-ways-in-which-political-conflicts-have-been-transformed-into-constitutional-struggles-over-federalism.
“State Laws Versus National Supremacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/social-science/1666245-an-interesting-aspect-of-american-politics-concerns-the-ways-in-which-political-conflicts-have-been-transformed-into-constitutional-struggles-over-federalism.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF State Laws versus National supremacy

Between the Law and Your School

There are circumstances where the federal and state laws conflict, but the federal law supersedes State law to control the covered subject.... Federal law also supersedes state laws to meet the terms of preemption.... Courts are expected to identify the extent and substance of federal preemption and protect state laws as extensive as possible.... In case of any conflict between the two bodies, courts entail preemption of state laws in absence of express preemption....
4 Pages (1000 words) Essay

The Principle of Indirect Effect

hellip; The concept of direct effect follows from the supremacy of European Law as formulated by the ECJ.... The concept of direct effect follows from the supremacy of European Law as formulated by the ECJ.... This is the underlying principle of the indirect effect, which establishes the supremacy of EC Law.... This implies that if an EC Law has direct effect then such law grants rights to individuals, which must be upheld by the national courts....
12 Pages (3000 words) Essay

The Issue of Constitutionality and the Rights Granted to Individual Citizens

Therefore in the UK, the supremacy of Parliament often rises in conflict with the issue of constitutionality or the rights granted to individual citizens.... However, the basic objective behind the framing of laws is to protect the rights of the individual citizens, which can be enforced only through the empowerment of the judiciary.... Parliament has been deputed as the supreme authority to make the laws of the land, through the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty....
8 Pages (2000 words) Case Study

The Effect of Direct Effect on Directives

hellip; States should not be prevented from reserving the doctrine of State liability in cases where implementation may involve substantial modifications to national legislation or where it would create severe confusion in allocating remedies.... According to the ruling laid out in this case, European Community regulations were also valid when tried in the national courts, because the regulations were similar to the national laws in that they had a similar effect upon an individual's rights and responsibilities....
10 Pages (2500 words) Essay

Article 234 EC Treaty and the European Court of Justice

hellip; The decision in Costa v ENEL served to establish the supremacy of EC law.... The doctrines of direct effect and the supremacy of the EC law over the national law are the fundamental foundations of this structure.... Under the doctrine of supremacy, the EC law precedes national law in the event of any conflict between the National law and the EC law.... Under Article 230, it acts as an Administrative Court that exercises judicial review over national and Community legislation....
8 Pages (2000 words) Research Paper

Judaism as the Oldest Monotheistic Religion

In return, Jews would have to follow the laws, rules, and regulations of the God through the prophets that He sent.... However, they, at the same time, also are of the view that there is some sort of special pact or agreement between them and God, and that Jews are obliged to abide by the laws of God than any other people.... Despite the fact that Israel is the biggest state of Jews, and was acquired as a Jewish state;… Moreover, France, Canada, United Kingdom, Russia and Argentina are the states with some considerable number of Jewish populations as well (Jospe, Madsen & Ward, pp....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Paralegal class assignmnet #5

In this case, the Supreme Court denounced its supremacy by ruling that it lacked jurisdiction over a state Supreme Court ruling that entails the application of state laws.... Instead, the Judges held that the case pertains to state laws and hence, the Supreme Court did not have the jurisdiction.... In this case, the Supreme Court denounced its supremacy by ruling that it lacked jurisdiction over a state Supreme Court ruling that entails the application… In my opinion, the Supreme Court has the power to determine state courts decision unless the case does not satisfy Article III of the US Constitution....
2 Pages (500 words) Assignment

Education Funding from 1800-1900

hellip; The author states that the Democratic Party of Virginia, based in Richmond, is an affiliate of the national party....  The elected House of Burgesses – the local and state assembly, enacted various religious laws, which made the state a foothold of Anglicanism.... In the paper “Education Funding from 1800-1900” the author discusses a new state constitution (1901), and statutes; where provisions such as literacy tests, residency requirements and poll tax, resulted in disfranchisement....
5 Pages (1250 words) Research Paper
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us