State Power

Question 1

Usery

Answer 1

The Fair Labor Standards Act extended the minimum wage requirement to all state employees. The Court struck the law because it interfered with a traditional state function. How much a state pays its employees is a policy decision entrusted to the states.

Question 2

Garcia

Answer 2

The Court struck the “traditional state functions” test because it was unworkable. The test allows the Court to distinguish between government functions, when it should be the political process that decides.

Question 3

Gregory v. Ashcroft

Answer 3

A state law required all of its judges to retire at the age of 70, in spite of the Age Discrimination & Employment Act. The Court upheld the law, employing a clear statement test. Because it was not clear that state judges were included in the ADEA, the Court would not read them into the law. Therefore, the state was within its power to set forth qualifications for its officials.

Question 4

New York v. US

Answer 4

The Radioactive Waste Policy contained a take-title provision, which required any state failing to comply with the Act to take title to their waste or face a penalty.
The Court held that this was unconstitutional. This provision served to “commandeer” the state government into the service of the federal regulatory service.

Question 5

Printz

Answer 5

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act required local law enforcement to run checks on every handgun purchase within their jurisdiction.
The Court held that the law forced state law enforcement to participate in the administration of a federal law, and was therefore unconstitutional.

Question 6

Sebelius (Medicare Expansion)

Answer 6

The Court struck down the Medicaid Expansion of the ACA on the grounds that it was coercive on the states.
The provision in question required the States to expand their programs, or to face the loss of their entire Medicaid budget. The court distinguished this from Dole, where only 5% of the funds were at stake.
This was not even a condition on how to use money, but rather a consequence of not accepting the expansion. The states had no choice.

Question 7

Comstock

Answer 7

The Court upheld §4248, which provided for the civil commitment of certain offenders in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
Because the law was rationally related to the implementation of an enumerated power, the authority to enact criminal laws, the N&P clause authorized the law (Sabri test).

Question 8

Chisholm

Answer 8

Federal suit by a citizen of one state against another state to recover on a Revolutionary War debt. The Court rejected Georgia’s sovereign immunity defense and allowed the suit to go forward.

Question 9

11th Amendment

Answer 9

“The Judicial power shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the U.S. by citizens of another state, or by citizens of any foreign state.”

Question 10

Hans v. Lousiana

Answer 10

The Court held that the 11th Amendment overturned Chisholm, and prohibited suits by a citizen against a state in federal court without the state’s consent.

Question 11

Limits on State Sovereign Immunity

Answer 11

1. Does not bar suits against states by the United States or suits by one state against another.
2. Local governments are not protected by sovereign immunity.
3. Suits by private individuals against state officers in their individual capacities are permitted.
4. A private litigant may sue a state for violating federal law if the state has waived its immunity.

Question 12

Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer

Answer 12

The Court held that Congress may abrogate sovereign immunity when it legislates under §5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Court has held that Congress lacks power to abrogate sovereign immunity when legislating under the Commerce Clause.

Question 13

Seminole Tribe

Answer 13

The Court held that Congress did not have the authority to abrogate sovereign immunity and subject the state to suit if it failed to negotiate in good with Indian Tribes about gambling.

Question 14

Types of Preemption

Answer 14

Express
Field
Conflict

Question 15

Pacific Gas

Answer 15

The Court held that a state law prohibiting the construction of nuclear facilities was preempted by a federal law because Congress intended to occupy the field of nuclear safety.

Question 16

Silkwood

Answer 16

The Court held that a federal law providing damages for persons injured by nuclear accidents did not preempt a person from also utilizing state tort law to obtain compensatory or punitive damages.

Question 17

Dormant Commerce Clause

Answer 17

Congress has been given power over interstate commerce. Therefore, even in the absence of federal legislation regulating the activity, the states cannot discriminate against interstate commerce or unduly burden interstate commerce, espcially when there is a need for national uniformity.

Question 18

Cooley

Answer 18

The Court allowed the state to maintain its regulation requiring all ships to have a pilot on board because no uniform national standard was required

Question 19

Dean Milk Co.

Answer 19

Court held that the state law requiring that all milk come from the state was unconstitutional because it interfered with interstate commerce without a legitimate state interest that could not have been solved in a non-discriminatory manner.

Question 20

Hughes v. Oklahoma

Answer 20

Court held that a state law prohibiting the importation of out-of-state minnows was unconstitutional because it discriminated against interstate commerce without pursuing the less discriminatory path

Question 21

Barnwell Bros.

Answer 21

Court held that a state law which prohibited trucks of a certain length from driving on state highways was constitutional because unless the law was plainly discriminatory against interstate commerce, the Court should have no role.
Barnwell Bros is no longer good law.

Question 22

Southern Pacific Co.

Answer 22

A law requiring that all trains be less than a certain length was unconstitutional because the law discriminates against interest commerce with no justification. Moreover, nationally uniformity was important.

Question 23

Kassel

Answer 23

The Court held that a law prohibiting trucks of a certain length on Iowa highways was unconstitutional because it posed an excessive burden on interstate commerce.

Question 24

City of Philadelphia

Answer 24

Court struck a law prohibiting out of state garbage in its landfill, deeming it a discriminatory, protectionist measure. Further, as a reasonable alternative, the state could have diverted their own trash to another state.