Dormant Commerce Clause Analysis

    The supremacy clause states that the United States Constitution, treaties, federal laws, and federal regulations are the supreme law of the land, if this didn’t exist then states would have more power over the federal government.

The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, and Clause 3. The Clause states that the United States Congress shall power, “To regulate Commerce with Foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” The Commerce Clause represents one of the most fundamental powers delegated to Congress. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Lopez and reversed his conviction, holding that, “Section 922, in the full reach of its terms, is invalid as beyond the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause” (Source 1.)

Each state has their own specific unique laws established individually for their state. In conjunction with those laws that exist over the people in their specific state there are also federal laws that govern the states as well as the people who live in them. These laws that govern the people are known as state laws and federal laws. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land in the United States. “It creates a federal system of government in which power is shared between the federal government and the state governments. Due to federalism, both the federal government and each of the state governments have their own court systems (Comparing

In the United States Constitution it is stated that “No single section of the constitution deals with federalism. Instead, the provisions dividing power between the states and the national government appear throughout the constitution. Most of the constitution is concerned with establishing the powers of the national government. National power is also based on the supremacy clause of article VI, which says that the constitution and laws made in accordance with it are “the supreme law of the land”. This means that when national and state laws conflict, the national laws will be followed. Article I, section 9 limits the power of the national government over individuals. The tenth amendment the constitution also limits the state powers in Article I, section10 and denies the states certain powers” (Keeping the

To begin with, these sugar regulations would need to set a limited on the amount of sugar allowed in these products. Otherwise, people will continue to consume more and more sugar. Right now, it is a fact that “Each 12-ounce serving of soda a person consumes each day raised type 2 diabetes risk by 10 to 15 percent, and many Americans are consuming

Since there is no text in the Constitution that states this the claims must be made by historical understanding and practice of the text. The people who are against this argue that in recent years that there has not been any precedent that relates to this kind of action. However they disagree with that and state there in fact has been the earliest congress had acts that also required state officials to participate in the enforcement of federal laws. They were doing so however since they did not know that power existed. The assumption that the federal government can command the state's executive power in the absence of a constitutional authorization is not indicated it is the opposite of that actually. Including that it has been around since the earlier is not true that there is some protection that the states have against this keeping their duty to keep their goals. The early legislation also has sources that indicate the original understanding of the Constitution. Alos that though they could and may be needed to regulate commerce they way the act was set up was not within its power to do so. They stayed with the old principle that states are not required to enforce it since state legislature is not required to follow or are a subject to federal direction. There is also a separation of powers that a state has and powers that the government

Many states refuse to pass the Volstead Act (54). This raises constitutional questions concerning state defiance. One concern that arises is that the states are still separate entities under one union (54). These states did not nullify the laws; they just simply did not follow the laws set in place by Congress at this time (54). With any state in defiance of the law, no one is being prosecuted for violating the Prohibition Act, which is clearly an issue if Congress is trying to enforce the

The decision of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals should be affirmed. The state of Eastland’s waste disposal regulation is neither discriminatory nor protectionist. Historically, businesses and professionals know that licensing requirements and authority belongs solely to states and local governments. A state government does not violate the commerce clause when it sets licensing requirements for incineration and interment of fetal tissues pursuant to its autonomy and police powers in carrying out local activities that has always been its traditional functions to ensure the health and safety of its citizens. Also, a state acts legitimately and fairly when having properly taxed its citizens towards the provision of a safe means of disposal of

One of the many powers given to Congress by the Constitution is the Commerce Clause. This clause allows Congress to regulate commerce between foreign nations, states, and Indian tribes. The authority laid out authorizes Congress to pass laws that ultimately regulate activities of states and citizens and free the restraints of states who feel otherwise. Throughout the history of the United States, the Commerce Clause has caused controversy over the extent that Congress can justify the use of this clause to pass laws. The Supreme Court has been relied on to determine the constitutionality of the laws and settle the controversies. One of these controversies lies within the Supreme Court case of United States v. Lopez.

The facts of this case consist of the state of Georgia enacting a law that requires all trucks and trailers operating within Georgia state lines to use contoured rear-fender mudguards. Furthermore, the state of Georgia prohibits the use of straight mudguards by making them illegal. However, straight mudguards are deemed to be legal in 35 other states including Georgia’s neighboring state, Florida- which explicitly requires the use of straight mudguards by law. Lastly, evidence suggests that contoured mudguards may be safer compared to straight mudguards.

Many store owners might argue that if they ban super-sized soda drinks they will be receiving less money because the bigger the drink the more it costs; however, the health of the U.S citizens is much more important because the more they consume those sugary foods and

The supremacy clause is the official law of the land and must be followed. This can recently be seen in the dispute of same sex marriage. It was up to the states to allow the same sex to be united in law, and many states left it to a vote of the people. Only a few states allowed it. After protesting and taking the matter to the Supreme Court, it has been ruled that all states will allow same sex marriage. For instance it was not allowed in California, but since this is now the supreme law all states including California’s decision has been overruled and now must abide by the federal law. State sovereign immunity allows officials to have legal protection in their everyday activities. For instance an example found at Study.com (http://study.com/academy/lesson/sovereign-immunity-definition-act-and-waivers.html) created a scenario where someone fell and hurt themselves in government property due to an icy sidewalk. If this was somehow caused by a government official while uphold their duties the person could not sue without the consent of the government. Since the person fell out of neglect of maintaining the property and not an official upholding their duties the person is allowed to sue. This protection was given to the states through supreme law and cannot be change, however throughout the years our own government has changed what it means to have sovereign immunity, but for the most part it

According to Samuelson, "state law controls only when there is no conflicting federal law and Congress has not intended to dominate the issue." Congress has stronger power when it is able to prove that it intend to exclusive control over issues (Samuelson, 114). Also, since Constitution of the US is the great legal document (Samuelson,

Since the presidency of our first commander in chief, there has been another set of opposing political philosophies; Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian (gateways). Federalists, who supported the Hamiltonian model, preferred a strong central government and believed this clause was stating the obvious. Democratic Republicans, who upheld the Jeffersonian model, preferred strong state and local governments, and feared that such a despotism would be detrimental to the country. Of course, Alexander Hamilton’s view won over. The Supremacy Clause states that the federal laws pursuant to the Constitution constitute to the supreme law of the land, and that state laws are bound by that, saying:

To commence, regulations are not all inclusive. For those who claim that food regulations are depriving us of our freedoms, they could not be more incorrect. In the article, “Should the Government Regulate What We Eat?”, Bert Glass makes the inspiring statement that, “...such a ban ultimately puts the American values of freedom and individualism in jeopardy.” However, in the case of the soda ban, there is the option to buy more than one 16 ounce serving at an establishment that is affected by the ban. In the eyes of the eateries affected and that of the Board of Health, this preserves freedom of choice while also trying to make the default option a healthy one. As far as infringement of individualism goes, Nutritionist Karen Congro, director of the Wellness for Life Program at the Brooklyn Hospital Center, points out that sugary drinks like Big-Gulps at 7-11 are not affected by the ban. Supermarkets, convenience stores, alcoholic, and dairy based beverages are not affected by the ban either. If