Week 5: Modern 10th Amendment + President & Congress Flashcards
How does the Court apply the 10th amendment to the decision in National League of Cities (1976) concerning wages of governmental workers?
The sovereignty to determine the wages of state government employees lies with the state.
Reason: Congress does not have the authority to make wage decisions that affect the functions of state governments. Commerce Clause power does not extend to state wages.
Four Conditions where a state activity can be immune from federal regulation under the Commerce Clause:
1) Federal statutes must regulate the “States as States”
2) statute must address matters that are “indisputably attributes of state sovereignty”
3) state compliance to the federal regulation must “directly impair the states ability to structure integral operations in areas of government function”
4) relation of state and federal interests must not be such that “the nature of the federal interest… justifies state submission”
Garcia’s issue with ruling in National League of Cities
no determination of “basic state prerogative” or “traditional government function”
Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1985) significance
Overruled the 10th amendment protection of the state’s authority to determine wages. The role of states in the Federal system lies in the federal government itself, which has built-in restraints to limit Commerce power provided through state participation in federal governmental actions.
Two methods of how Congress can urge a state to adopt a legislative program with federal interests.
1) Congress’ spending powers
2) having state law pre-empted by federal regulation
New York v. United States (1992)
The Federal Government cannot coerce states to impose regulations. Decision-making lies in the people electing their state representatives, and should their local government not reflect their wants, they will elect new representatives to do so. States cannot be forced to choose between two unconstitutionally coercive regulatory techniques.
Issues with Brandy Handgun Violence Protection Act as identified in Printz v. United States
Federal gov’t cannot impress state officials to work in their service. Similar to the ruling in New York, the Federal gov’t cannot force states to address particular problems, or command State officers or political subdivisions to act enforcing federal regulations.
The president interprets their authority from
The Constitution
United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936)
The President’s power over foreign affairs reaches beyond the Constitution; as a nation-state has inherent power over foreign affairs and the President is the US’ representative.
Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)
The President doesn’t have the authority to seize and nationalize the production of Steel, only Congress can.
Justice Jackson’s 3 situations of Presidential Power
1) Maximum: when the President and Congress agree on an act. “When the President acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress”
2) Twilight Zone: Congress is silent on an issue “President acts in absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority”
3) Minimum: When the President says yes, but Congress says no. “President takes measures incompatible with the express or implied will of Congress” Can rely on his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers Congress has.
Note: Supreme Court speed
When it wants to, the Supreme Court can act quickly to hear and try a case that it considers important or urgent
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004)
Determined “a court that receives a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from an alleged enemy combatant must itself ensure that the minimum requirements of due process are achieved. “
-O’Connor’s limited due process hearing for an enemy combatant that is a US Citizen in US custody
-President & Congress agree: Jackson’s 1st category
Notes: Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)
War Crime tribunals to prosecute enemy combatants for war crimes lacked the power to try Hamdan, a Yemeni national who was bin Laden’s chauffer.
Notes: Boumediene v. Bush (2007) & (2008)
2007: upheld the Military Commissions Act of 2006 which overruled Hamdan decision
2008: reversed 2007 decision and found that detainees at Guantanamo Bay have a right to file habeas claims