Reference no: EM133046286
The United States government is characterized as Federalism, which means power is shared between the federal and state government. The federal government has the authority to implement laws that govern all states, and states also have the authority to govern themselves.
The federal government has "limited powers" to exercise over the entirety of the nation, such as a levying a tax. However, if the Constitution does not explicitly bestow a particular governing authority to the federal government, than that authority belongs to the state. Collectively these authorities make up a states police power, which is a states ability to exercise authority over a variety of areas that are intended to promote the common good of the people. The textbook psychically references a vaccination mandate as an example of a policing power. (Longest, 2016).
The Constituion contains a "Supremacy Clause," which states that the Constitution, and federal laws authorized by the Constitution, are the paramount lawmaking authories. Thus, a state's self-governing authority is accurately summed up as, "so long as a state's policy does not violate the Constitution or a federal law, that stay may govern itself."
To recap, sometimes states are sovereign, but sometimes the federal government is sovereign. Naturally, disputes happen which is when the courts are requested to settle the disputes. This is where the courts serve as "referees." These disputes are common, and the result of governmental sharing over power between states and the federal government. Like a referee in a sports match, the courts judge if a player has acted within the rules of the game; the rules are written in the Constitution, and the players are other branches or levels of government. For example, if the State of Alabama were to dispute the federal government, and the courts ruled the actions of the federal government to be unconstitutional, then they would favor the State of Alabama in the settlement of the dispute. (Longest, 2016).
A good example of the Supreme Court acting as a Constitutional referee is shown in one of the many challenges to the Affordable Care Act. In the case National Federation of Independent Business vs. Sebelius, the Supreme Court ruled that the individual mandate of the ACA was in fact constitutional. Had the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, the individual mandate would have been revoked. (Longest, 2016). The courts may also rule that an agency may have overstepped its own authority with a particular action, thereby revoking that particular action. In 1996, the Food & Drug Administration attempted to regulate the availability of cigarettes to children and adolescents. Brown & Williamson tobacco company brought this before the Supreme Court, who ruled that the FDA did not in fact have the authority to regulate tobacco. (Longest, 2016).
Roe v. Wade is another example of a case brought before the Supreme Court to act as a referee. Amidst the controversy surrounding the federal legality of abortion, the courts ruled that a woman should be able to procure an abortion, as this was Constitutionally protected by her right to liberty and her right to privacy. (Roe v. Wade. (n.d.).
Dred Scott v. Sanford is another instance in which the Supreme Court was requested to act as a referee to settle a dispute. The dispute was whether or not Congress had the authority to abolish slavery in the free states. The ruling, in 1857, was that slavery was indeed Constitutional, as people of African descent did not have the Constitutional rights of citizens and were also considered property, not citizens. (Scott v. Sanford, n.d.).
(READ THE ABOVE and ANSWER THE QUESTIONS BELOW)
- Which ideas or thoughts did you read that you found interesting or insightful? How did these ideas or thoughts inform your own thinking?
- Are there any sections that you think you read that could expound upon? (e.g. "I'd really like to hear more about how you think political corruption is a primary factor in this case.")
- What thoughts or questions does your reading response trigger for you?