Presentation on theme: "National Supremacy… McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) 10 th does not limit fed. Gov. to powers in Con Necessary & Proper Cl. - power to create bank When state/national."— Presentation transcript:
National Supremacy… McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) 10 th does not limit fed. Gov. to powers in Con Necessary & Proper Cl. - power to create bank When state/national powers conflict – national “is supreme within its sphere of action”
Dual Federalism Both sovereign within own sphere of action Hammer v. Dagenhart1918 -the power of the national government under the Commerce Clause to ban goods produced by child labor from sale in interstate commerce. Broad nat’l gov. power over almost every aspect of American life Narrow limits power of federal gov. over the states Comm. Clause defined narrowly
States Rights vs. Civil Rights Brown v. Board of Education 1954 Education is a reserved power –10 th am. Neither National gov nor S.Ct had authority over education Southern Manifesto – sovereignty of So. States. …”to resist forced integration by any lawful means”
1957“Little Rock Nine” 1962 University of Mississippi 101 st airborne Federal troops 1963 University of Alabama Civil Rights est. supremacy of federal law over states Rights – in area of education
Modern Federalism New Deal…1930’s U.S. v. Darby Lumber Company…1941 (minimum wages /maximum hours for industries engaged in interstate commerce) S.Ct. stated that 10 th not an independent source of states’ rights, but merely a truism Feds retain authority to “resort to all means for the Exercise of a granted power…adapted to the per- mitted end”. Court overturned Hammer – and greatly expanded Federal power under the Commerce Clause.
Court Swings… 1976… National League of Cities v. Usery min wage/overtime does not apply to state/local gov. employees5-4 1985…Garcia v. San Antonio Metro. Transit Authority overturned Usery 5-4 Dissenting opinions: “…effectively reduces 10 th amendment to meaning- less rhetoric” “…relegates to the states the trivial role that Antifederalists feared they would occupy”
RELATIONSHIP OF 9 TH AND 10 TH AMENDMENTS LIBERAL JUSTICES 9 TH as imp. Source of ind. Rights BUT are reluctant to enforce 10 th as a source of states’ rights CONSERVATIVE JUS. Insist on enforcing the10th as a guarantee states’ rights ag. Fed. Gov. BUT Dismisss the 9 th protection of unenumerated rights