The Federal Courts and Federalism

Learning Objectives Analyze the role of the national courts in regulating federalism.

McCulloch v. Maryland The federal courts claimed the power to decide which level of government should do what, for whom, and to whom. Established the doctrines of national supremacy and implied powers.

McCulloch v. Maryland “Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the constitution are constitutional.” - Chief Justice John Marshall on implied powers.

McCulloch v. Maryland “ The power to tax involves the power to destroy…If the right of the States to tax the means employed by the general government be conceded, the declaration that the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme law of the land, is empty and unmeaning declamation.” - Chief Justice John Marshall on national supremacy

Federal Courts and the States The authority of federal judges to review the activities of state and local governments has expanded over recent decades. – Judicial interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause – Almost every state action is now subject to challenge

Federal Courts and the State Preemption – Occurs when a federal law or regulation takes precedence over a state or local law or regulation – Applies when “federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject.” (Ex: Nevada v. Hibbs, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965)