Taking What They Give Us: Explaining the Court’s Federalism Offensive

نویسنده

  • KEITH E. WHITTINGTON
چکیده

For several years now, the Supreme Court has disquieted observers and commentators by reasserting the presence of constitutional limitations on national power resulting from the federal structure of the American political system. Although not quite amounting to a revolution in American constitutional law, the recent federalism cases are nonetheless striking. They are, of course, most remarkable because they reverse over fifty years of nearly uninterrupted deference to the national government in matters relating to federalism and the structural limits on the powers of the central government. With the exception of an ill-fated attempt to identify such limits in 1976, under the guidance of then–Associate Justice William Rehnquist, the

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Facial Challenges and Federalism

This Essay addresses the question of whether challenges to legislation as exceeding Congress’ powers should be assessed on a facial or an as-applied basis, a question that rose to the fore in the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Tennessee v. Lane. The Essay begins by arguing that what distinguishes a facial challenge is that it involves an attack on some general rule embodied in the statute. ...

متن کامل

Towards an Integrated Model of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Federalism Decision Making

Disputes involving the boundaries of state versus federal power make up a substantial portion of the U.S. Supreme Court’s docket and have undergone extensive analysis. Yet, the conventional wisdom regarding the justices’choices in these cases is that they are highly inconsistent. I argue that this is primarily a function of the failure of scholars to develop a comprehensive model of the justice...

متن کامل

The Mysterious Lockstep Doctrine and the Future of Judicial Federalism in Illinois

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 966 I. THE JUDICIAL FEDERALISM DEBATE ............................................... 967 A. Evolution of Judicial Federalism in the United States ............ 967 B. The Arguments in the Dependent-Independent Debate .......... 969 II. ANALYZING THE LOCKSTEP DOCTRINE IN ILLINOIS JURISPRUDENCE .......

متن کامل

The Federalism Implications of Campaign Finance Regulation

Recent controversies in campaign finance have generated concerns that wealthy donors will dominate the political landscape, with Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission1 and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission2 standing as the high-water marks in the U.S. Supreme Court’s jurisprudential turn towards deregulation. This short Essay puts this case law in perspective by briefly explain...

متن کامل

Can Courts Make Federalism Work? A Game Theory Approach to Court-Induced Compliance and Defection in Federal Systems

Few studies on federalism analyze the role of courts as safeguards of the federal arrangement, and those that do tend to be too optimistic about what courts can do. This article analyzes the effect of judicial review on the interaction between the central and a regional government in a federation in order to understand the conditions under which courts may or may not enforce compliance with fed...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2001