1 2 3 4 5 6 7 AMERICAN POLITICS: Eric J. Williams, PhD. Dept. Chair of Criminology & Criminal Justice Studies Sonoma State University FEDERALISM: Overview of Today s Lecture - McCulloch v. Maryland; Scott v. Sandford - - Return to Dual Federalism and the Rise of State Power - Printz v. United States The Marshall Court McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) Maryland passes law to tax Second Bank of the United States Decided the constitutionality of the Second Bank of the United States Broadened the federal government s power under the Necessary and Proper Clause The Marshall Court Marshall vastly expanded the Federal Government role in American politics Created Supreme Court as true co-equal branch of government Helped define many of the most important powers listed in the Constitution The Taney Court Andrew Jackson and John Marshall battle over states rights Worcester v. Georgia (1832) Jackson appoints Roger Taney as Chief Justice, 1836 Jackson appoints Roger Taney as Chief Justice, 1836 The Taney Court 1
Scott v. Sandford (1857) One of three most controversial SCOTUS decisions in history Dred Scott had no right to sue in federal court because he was a slave Found the Missouri Compromise of 1820 unconstitutional All but guaranteed that the Civil War would occur 8 9 What are they? state is in charge of Health, Welfare, Safety, Morals Early Cases Lochner v. New York Act (1905), The Bake Shop Act Court begins to recognize some federal police powers Champion v. Ames (1903), The Lottery Act 10 Mann Act unlawful to transport women across state lines for immoral purposes Post WW2, Congress broadly expands federal police powers and Court upholds laws Allows Federal Government to use money to get state compliance 55 MPH speed limit; 21 year old drinking age 11 Keating-Owen Child Labor Act prohibited the interstate shipment of goods produced by child labor 2
Dagenhart sued on behalf of his freedom to allow his 14-yearold son to work in mill 12 13 14 15 Day spoke for Court majority, giving two grounds to invalidate the law: Production was not commerce and thus outside Congress power to regulate Regulation of production was reserved by 10 th Amendment to the States Framers purposely left the word expressly out of amendment believed it was not possible to specify every power that might be needed in the future National Labor Relations Act of 1935 Congress determined labor-management disputes were directly related to flow of interstate, therefore could be regulated by national government National Labor Relations Board charged Jones & Laughlin Steel Co. with discrimination against employees that were union members Court held the Act was narrowly constructed so as to regulate industrial activities which had the potential to restrict interstate commerce Justices abandoned notion that labor relations had only an indirect effect on commerce 3
indirect effect on commerce 16 17 Ability of employees to engage in collective bargaining is an essential condition of industrial peace National government therefore justified in penalizing corporations engaging in interstate commerce which refuse to confer and negotiate with workers Return to Dual Federalism Major part of the new conservatism of Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan States should retain more autonomy and power 18 In 1992, the Court makes major shift in New York v. United States Low Level Return to Dual Federalism Radioactive Waste attempt by the federal government to get states to deal with the issue Most of the law included incentives for compliance included a take title provision that forces States to assume liability for waste created in the State Court claims this oversteps federal government s powers Feds can encourage, but not coerce states to comply with federal laws 19 Printz v. United States (1997) Part of the Brady Bill 3 Day waiting period on handgun sales cooling off period allows law enforcement to do background checks (national database yet to be established) 4
established) During first 5 years, local law enforcement would have to issue licenses and do background checks 20 Printz v. United States (1997) Court decided in 1997 this was an overstep of congressional power States could not be forced to do background checks for the federal government Most of the effect was symbolic, as national database was in place 6 months after the decision 5