Federalism of Flourish the US Land - Article Example

Supremacy Clause The Constitution is considered as the most supreme law of the land. If a law or constitution conflict a constitutional federal law, then the federal law will be uphold by the state judges. This essay is going to basically focus on the clauses in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that have allowed the expansion of national government power; and how Article VIs Supremacy Clause plays a role; also it will discuss which amendment in the Bill of Rights is intended to act as a countering force to restrict such expansion and the major cases of McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden legitimized Congress use of these clauses to expand the power of the national government; and finally it will, analyze the impact of The New Deal upon American federalism. What is its legacy on contemporary American politics? Clauses in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution "Constitution and the Laws of the United States … shall be the most supreme Law of the Land." Hence it is known as the Supremacy Clause. This clause meant that the federal government, in executing any of the powers spell out in the Constitution, must exist over any contradicting or incompatible state exercise of power (Joyce et.al. 390). In the US system of federalism, for a federal law to be constitutional, it should be an implementation of Congress’s powers specified in Article I, Section 8. Under the Article I, Section 8 of the us Constitution; the congress has been mandated with the power to set and collect taxes, duties, to pay the Debts and offer for the general Defense and common Welfare of the United States; however all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be equal all through the United States; borrowing of money on credit of the United States; To control Commerce with overseas Nations, and amongst the number of States, and with tribes of Indian origin; To set up an equal Rule of Naturalization, and identical Laws on the issue of Bankruptcies right through the United States; to provide punishment to those counterfeiting as well as current Coin of the United States; To create Post Offices and post Roads; To make up Tribunals lower to the supreme Court; To announce War, approve Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Policies relating to Capturing of on Land and Water; To bring up and maintain Armies, except taking away of Money to that Use will be for a wider period exceeding two Years; To supply and sustain a Navy; To classify and discipline Pirates and criminal acts that happened on the high Seas, and Offences violating the Law of Nations; To create laws for the Government and Regulating of the army and navy; To create calling onward the Militia to implement the Laws of the Union, hold back Insurrections and deter incursion To offer for arranging, arming, and maintaining discipline, the Militia, and for ruling over such Part of them as may be engaged in the Service of the United States, set aside to the States in that order, the Appointing of the Officers, and the Authority of guiding the Militia depending to the discipline as prescribed by Congress; To encourage advancement of Science and other useful Arts, through securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the sole Right to their individual Writings and Discoveries; To create all Laws which shall be essential and appropriate for carrying into Implementation the preceding Powers and all other Powers committed by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Unit or Officer of that, and ; To exercise sole Legislation in all Cases by any means, over such District not more than ten Miles square as may, by act of ceding a certain States, and the Recognition of Congress, turn out to be the position of the Government of the United States, and to carrying out like Authority over all Places purchased by the Approval of the Legislature of the State where by the Same shall be, for the Production of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards among other needful Buildings; (Joyce et.al.,390). Amendment in the bill of rights, that intended to act as a countering force to restrict such expansion. At the end of the Civil War, the Supreme Court was further compassionate of States Rights and used the Tenth Amendment, that offer the powers not assigned to the federal government are set aside to the states or to the people, to give good reason for its position. Court changed its position and cited the Supremacy Clause in the year 1930, to give the federal government broad national power. It is until 1930s when the Court changed its position and brought up the Supremacy Clause to provide the federal government wide national power. The federal government can’t unwillingly be under the control of the laws of any state (Curtis 400). How the Supreme Court decisions in Mcculloch v. Maryland and gibbons v. Ogden legitimized congress use of these clauses to expand the power of the national government. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall quoted the Supremacy Clause in cases that coagulate federal power together with McCullough v. Maryland (1819), and Gibbons v. Ogden (1824). Gibbons v. Ogden (1824).The Court generally ruled that the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8 provided the Congress with the power to control throughway commerce. As stated by Chief Justice John Marshall, the main important idea of the federal government was to “rescue the United States from the humiliating and devastating outcome, as the result of the legislation of so many diverse States, and to place it under the protection of a consistent law.” Moreover, the decision to appeal to the Supremacy Clause and declared that state laws that disagree with constitutional acts of Congress “must give up” to the Constitution. The case was concerning to the constitutional principles together with economic rights and federalism, and civic morals together with industry (Bill of rights Institutes-website). Mcculloch v. Maryland In a undisputed verdict, the Court maintained that Congress was in capacity to include the bank and that Maryland can’t tax mechanism of the state government engaged in the execution of constitutional powers. Chief Justice Marshall noted down that Congress infatuated to pay powers not clearly highlighted in the Constitution. Marshall also noted that as the states hold on to the power of taxation, "the constitution and the laws completed in injunction of that are supreme . . ...They manage the constitution and laws of the relevant states, and cannot be regulated by them" (Bill of rights Institutes-website). The impact of the new deal upon American federalism Some have argued that allowing the state to set welfare of level to increase the number of combinations of taxing and spending available so that citizens have more choice in selecting places matching their preferences .Others have maintained that if the states bear the responsibility for redistributive programs, the free rider problem will be severe; state will consequently limit their welfares provision, hoping that some of other state government will take care of it (Brown & Oate 400). This debate hinges on two empirical issues. The first concerns the effect of welfare policy on residential choices. Some have found that welfare policy on residential choices. Some have found that welfare policies have little influence on individuals’ decisions about where to live and that people migrate (or remain at home ) mainly for reasons of family or job opportunities (Fields 821). The other issue concerns how states determine their welfare policies. The dominant approach to the state policy making holds (often implicitly) that politicians respond to political forces of economic condition within their states (Jennings 330). A contrasting approach emphasizes that states are engaged in economic competition and that policy makers establish procedures to enhance their states relative economic (Peterson 720). What is its legacy on contemporary American politics? The US prison population has increased to almost triple over the past two decades, and the US has the utmost rate of imprisonment in the developed world. In spite of these details, politicians from across the ideological scale, continue to campaign on "law and order" stage and to propose about sentencing laws. According to conservative wisdom, the aggravation of the crime and drug problems has made the public become more penal, and "server" anti-crime rule are politicians collective response to this popular feeling. Katherine Beckett defies this explanation, opposing in its place that the origins of the castigation shift in crime control policy rest in the political instead of the penal field mainly in the disorderly period of the 1960s (Soss 291). Conclusion From the above illustration one can deduce the role of the Article VIs Supremacy Clause and the amendment in the Bill of Rights is that intended to act as a countering force to restrict such expansion. Also, it can be noted the verdict of the supreme court in the cases of McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden legitimized Congress and the impact that has brought to the federal government. In its concluding end there is an analyzation of the impact of The New Deal upon American federalism. Work cited Bill of rights Institutes – available on http://billofrightsinstitute.org/resources/educator-resources/americapedia/americapedia-landmark-supreme-court-cases/gibbons-v-ogden/ (website) Bradley, Curtis A. "The treaty power and American federalism." Michigan Law Review (1998): 390-461. Kazanas, Nuria, and M. L. Fields. "Nutritional improvement of sorghum by fermentation." Journal of Food Science 46.3 (1981): 819-821. Peterson, Paul E., and Mark Rom. "American federalism, welfare policy, and residential choices." The American political science review (1989): 711-728. Schotch, Peter K., and Raymond E. Jennings. "Inference and necessity." Journal of Philosophical Logic 9.3 (1980): 327-340. Soss, Joe. "Making clients and citizens: Welfare policy as a source of status, belief, and action." Deserving and entitled: Social constructions and public policy (2005): 291-328. Wildasin, David E. "Some rudimetary ‘duopolity’theory." Regional Science and Urban Economics 21.3 (1991): 393-421. Read More