Political Science 101 Macdonald Dual Federalism? Political Science 101 Macdonald

Disagreement among drafters of the Constitution about how much power states should have RESULT – ever changing ideas about federalism, national supremacy and states’ rights Officially a theory of dual federalism (state gov’t and national gov’t equally authoritative) emerged

Expanded Federal Power Often disagreements settled through lawsuits McCullough vs. Maryland (1819) – 1816 Congress authorized Bank of the US; MD imposed tax on all banks not chartered by their state James McCullough, of Bank of US in MD, refused to pay tax Chief Justice John Marshall first looked at whether Congress had power to charter bank (not explicitly stated in Article I)

Determined that Congress has power to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper, for carrying into execution the foregoing powers” – referred to this as necessary and proper clause Because Congress had power to collect tax, coin money, reasonable to charter national bank Further, said that MD did not have power to tax federal institutions be/ could be used to destroy federal institutions and therefore destroy federalism Interpretation enhanced power of federal government over states

Expanded Federal Power Cohens v. Virginia (1821) – Brothers convicted under VA law for selling tix in a lottery approved by Congress Appealed to S.C. VA said SC had no authority to review decisions that it issued in its own state Marshall wrote that SC had ultimate authority over all judicial matters concerning federal law Further expanded power of federal gov’t

Expanded Federal Power Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) NY law granted specific steamboat operators exclusive service between NY and NJ Marshall court said that was commerce among states and federal gov’t, not state, had power to regulate interstate commerce Gave superior powers to national gov’t over state gov’ts

Conflict Constitution itself more vague 10th Amendment – “powers not delegated to US by Constitution, nor prohibited by it to states, are reserved to States…” Many states interpret this to mean national gov’t is not superior

State Supremacy? Before Civil war, many southern leaders relied on doctrine of nullification (states retained sovereignty upon joining US) – gov’t established was a voluntary pact between states and fed. gov’t limited- states could declare any law “null and void” if wanted 1830s SC voted to nullify tariffs – later compromised Expression of dual federalism

State Supremacy? Doctrine of secession also expression of dual federalism States had sovereignty and not subordinate to national gov’t and therefore could withdraw at any time 1861 11 states seceded leading to civil war

New Amendments Civil War ended ideas of nullification and secession Still issues with states rights Ie. Many refused to enforce federal voting rights and antidiscrimination laws Constitution amended to prevent specific assertions of state authority 13th: banned slavery 14th: states couldn’t interfere w/ certain rights of individuals 15th: right to vote for former slaves

A New US During Industrial Age in America, many ppl first looked to states to deal w/ effects of urbanization In most states, though, corporate interests controlled state gov’ts & offered little help Many turned then to federal gov’t Congress started to become more active Interstate Commerce Act est. Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) – rules for transporting goods Sherman Antitrust Act – tried to prevent monopolies

A Changing Court? Many challenged in S.C. SC generally ruled in favor of states US vs. E.C. Knight Company – sugar refining was “manufacturing” not “commerce” so Congress couldn’t control Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) – law barring goods made by child labor struck down Over history of US, evidence of changing concepts of federalism

Daily Critical Thinking What is your opinion about federalism? Do you think our current government is exerting too much power? Explain.