The Doctrine Of Federal Preemption

Although the balance of power between the national government and the states has changed over the years, the federalist system is a fundamental part of the U.S. government (The White House, 2013). The states sponsor important programs to fund education, help troubled cities and provide social services. At the local level, the municipalities control a number of other services and regulations, but never fail to be in collaboration between the national, state and local governments. The constitution was put into place to support and defend the basic right of civilians of the United States (Marchant, 2003). Although the Constitution does not refer to education, operation and management of schools is made, particularly with respect to amendments to protect individual rights of students, faculty and staff. With these set laws into place to hold our country

Review Questions for Mid-Term 1) What constitutional clause allows laws enacted by the federal government to take priority over conflicting state laws?

The American Constitution provides for a division of government powers between the federal and state governments, as well as provides solutions in an event of conflict between these two governments. The Supremacy Clause is derived through Constitutional Law and determines that the Constitution, Federal statutes, and United States treaties contain the “supreme law of the land”, creating the framework for the highest areas of law within the American legal system. Article VI, Section 2 of the United States Constitution contains The Supremacy Clause.

Describe the Supremacy Clause and explain what happens when there is a direct conflict between federal and state law.

The purpose of this research is to rationalize an amendment to the Constitution of the United States forcing Supreme Court Justices into a medical review to determine if the Justices are physically and mentally able to continue to serve their tenure. The focus is to create a half way point between two opinions in the very controversial subject of the Supreme Court Justices tenure. As the Judicial Branch becomes more active, citizens have questioned the rationale of justices serving for life, while others maintain that there is no need for change. The middle ground purposed is the establishment of a medical review of the justices and the hard part is establishing when they are medically unfit to serve. Considering the Constitutional purpose

Federalism has played a large role in our government since the time that the Constitution was ratified. It originally gave the majority of the power to the states. As time went on, the national government gained more and more power. It used the "necessary and proper" clause of the Constitution to validate its acts, and the Supreme Court made decisions that strengthened the national government creating a more unified United States. Finally, the recent course of federalism has been to give powers back to the states.

Being that The Supreme Court declares what is or is not constitutional, they didn’t view this to be an issue. If states decided to misuse its power. For instance, the First Amendment declares “Congress” that cannot make regulations restricting freedom of speech. However, states were unrestricted to make such laws; nothing was present in the constitution that required the states to shield rights established in the constitution. The Supreme Court would have to subject to the states in way because individuals are granted new civil liberties in The Constitution supported by the federal government and not the state.

States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which

Thomas Jefferson was commenting that the Bill of Rights from governmental. Both the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution had more purpose; The Bill of Rights was meant to give citizens of the U.S. promising freedom to rely on. The Constitution set terms for the U.S. to abide by. The Constitution was established for the people and was a social contract; it was an agreement between the government and society to protect the nation’s deserved rights and liberties. The Bill of Rights was included in the Constitution; it is the first ten amendments which were included to guarantee personal rights. One interesting amendment that has tested numerous times through the Supreme Court is the Eighth Amendment: no cruel or unusual punishment, it definitely changed America’s on what punishment is considered cruel and unusual.

Indirectly, or directly, one can argue, public schools are controlled by the federal and state governments. Several issues have emerged, because of the conflict between federal and state requirements for education. “Under the Tenth Amendment, any authority not given specifically to the federal government is reserved to the states. Thus, the federal government has no authority to regulate education directly; that belongs to the states” (Underwood, n. d., p. 2). To get around this, the federal government controls the schools through funds for complying with certain initiatives, procedures, and policies (Underwood, n. d.). Ironically, both the state and federal levels of government hold the district liable for implementing different agendas and legal obligations. The federal government, however, can ensure that no citizen is denied their rights or privileges, even in a private institution, because of the Bill of Rights and other amendments. Failure to comply by these amendments or statutes can lead to the loss of federal funding and legal reproductions for schools.

Do you know that notifying your fellow Americans of their constitutional rights was a Federal crime? Well it was during World War One (WWI). In the case Schenck v. the United States, schenck tried to remind his fellow Americans of their constitutional rights and also let them know that the draft was being used as a form of militarized slavery. This case contained men who his right was taken away after he tried to get the military draftees to fight against the draft. However Congress took his right of speech away when it was arrested and convicted of violating the Espionage Act of 1917. This was the time the WWI one had broken out, the government need men to fight. They were short staffed for that to work and they need man to fight this

In the Case of Missouri v. Seibert, a mother named Patrice Seibert was convicted of second degree murder. Patrice Seibert had a son named Jonathan who was twelve years old and had cerebral palsy. Jonathan Seibert suddenly died in his sleep, and his mother thought that she would be held responsible for his sudden death. Ms. Seibert then devised a plan with her two older sons and their friends. She wanted to cover up the death of Jonathan, so she conspired with her sons and their friends to cover up the death by burning down their mobile home. Donald Rector was a mentally ill individual who stayed with the Seibert’s and later died as the home went up in flames. Several days later, Seibert was taken into the police station and questioned about the mysterious mobile home fire. While being interrogated, the officer waved Ms. Seibert’s Miranda rights. She was questioned for thirty to forty minutes before she was given a break. While being questioned, the officer hoped that Ms. Seibert would voluntarily confess to the crimes that had taken place. After her break, she was then questioned a second time. This time, the officer turned on a recorder and then read Ms. Seibert her Miranda Warnings, and the officer also obtained a signed waiver of rights from Seibert.

The United States government operates under a federalist system meaning that there are two or more governments who share the same power over one geographic region. In this case it would be the state and federal governments. The 10th amendment of the U.S. Constitution summarizes the idea of federalism, stating that “The powers not delegated to the US by the Constitution, nor prohibited by the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people” (U.S. Constitution). This means that the federal government, whose jurisdiction is very limited, has jurisdiction over some thing while the state government has jurisdiction over

Chief Justice, John Marshall used Marbury v. Madison to rule that a federal law was unconstitutional. The cases of Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, and Cohens v. Virginia resulted in a ruling that the Constitution was the final say, but only if the Court had the right to overturn state court decisions. In the case of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, the state’s government sought to appoint members to the college’s board of trustees, although the college opposed this. Dartmouth ended up being victorious in the Supreme Court. Another Supreme Court case that showed the strengthen of the federal government over the individual’s state governments was that of McCulloch v. Maryland. The Supreme Court ended up ruling that it was unconstitutional for individual states to tax the Bank of the United States. In the case of Gibbons v. Ogden, the Supreme Court demonstrated its power to regulate interstate

As a result of federalism, whereby government system of the United States has generated an overlap of power as a result of delegating some powers to the federal government and others to the state to exercise, there has therefore been a conflict in the undertaking of criminal justice in courts. Article six of the United States constitution contains a supremacy clause that pronounces the role of judges in every state as bound by the constitution (Banks, 34). This is however subject to different interpretation because when these laws interfere with the laws of the congress, the act of congress is deemed supreme even though the latter is in pursuance of the constitution, it must conform to the laws of congress. For instance, the United States district courts have jurisdiction to hear federal cases and deciding the constitutionality of federal laws. However the constitution gives powers to the congress to control and determine the cases to