The North Shore Safe Renters Ordinance Essay

The delegation of powers between the state and federal governments of the United States of America is a country old conflict, a subject of debate to this day. Currently, state legislations have the ability to ratify amendments, manage public health and safety, make and enforce laws, make taxes, borrow money, supervise trade in the state, and whatever other laws are not reserved for the federal government or prohibited by the Constitution. However, limiting the powers of state governments is not unheard of. While this action would result in a variety of pros and cons, ultimately the division of power between the national and state governments should remain untouched. As previously mentioned, limiting the powers of state governments would not be without its pros.

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.

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

The US Constitution defines the federal government as “The Supreme Law of the land”, known as the Supremacy Clause. Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution states that, should the federal government exercise their rights enumerated in the Constitution, they would prevail over any conflicting state implementation of power. The clause ensures that the federal laws take precedence over state laws and ensures that state judges uphold these laws. The Supremacy Clause checks the power of the local governments by

To define the terminology of federalism to a simplistic way is the sharing of sovereignty between the national government and the local government. It is often described as the dual sovereignty of governments between the national and the local to exert power in the political system. In the US it is often been justified as one of the first to introduce federalism by the ‘founding fathers’ which were developed in order to escape from the overpowered central government. However, federalism in the United States is hitherto uncertain where the power lies in the contemporary political system. In this essay I will outline and explain how power relationship alternates between states and federal government. Moreover I will also discuss my

The relationship between the Federal government and the states is well stable. The Federal government has powers given by the Constitution as well powers or privileges are given to the states which promotes a balance between the two so that our country is not ruled under one specific party or group. The question now is that, are the states rights more than well protected in the current constitution and the political practice.

The Tenth Amendment states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states’, are reserved to the states’ respectively, or the people (List of Amendments to the United States Constitution). The Bill of Rights is a clear establishment of the restrictions on Federal authority. James Madison, along with numerous other framers, feared the monarchical powers. The framers fought against the tyrannical rule of the King, setting forth the foundation upon which the colonies designed their government and consequently led to the authoring and ratification of the Constitution. The US Constitution’s purpose can be said to have been to fill in the gaps of all the unenumerated powers of the states. This is where we begin to understand the confusion of two centers of power with sovereign authority. Which one leads the nation by authority? Or as I like to say, “which came first, the chicken or the egg?” The Supremacy Clause was set forth to dispel the issues that confuse us all between the federal law and state law. Article VI of the Constitution establishes the laws and treaties of the United States made in accordance with it as the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every

As previous mentioned the tenth amendment protects state power to govern themselves so long as that governance does not defy the Constitution. In the article, “Morality Policy and Federalism: Innovation, Diffusion and Limits” by Robyn Hollander and Haig Patapan, they discuss if federalism supports and allows for innovation and diffusion. In the journal, they discuss how the case of Gonzales v. Raich, which was a case where two women with severe illness were growing marijuana and challenged the DEA agents who had destroyed their plants in 2005 during a search, and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the DEA agents based on the fact these women may, while it not their original intention, sell the marijuana they have grown, which could go to other

Whether under the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHA), which makes it illegal to discriminate in housing on the basis of an individual’s handicap, Ms. Mary Land, the widowed owner, manager, and landlord¬¬ of a historic building with Tiffany stained glass transforms, extinct pinewood flooring, and mahogany woodwork¬, violated the FHA by refusing to rent an apartment to Mr. Jim Rent, a potential paraplegic tenant with acute transverse myelitis (ATM), when enforcing a first-come first-served parking policy, where there are only three allocated spots available to the nine apartments, and a no-pets policy, where Ms. Land had an allergy and a tenant potential could go into anaphylactic shock, where Mr. Rent required access to a dedicated parking spot for his specially-equipped van, which allowed him to use his mobility device the iBOT™, the use of a medical alert response companion dog (MARC dog), that was certified, prescribed, and trained to assist Mr. Rent with his daily routine, and needed to make structural modifications to the apartment and bathroom, in order to insure his mobility and safety in the apartment, even though Mr. Rent, six months prior, had a history of leaving items on the stove, causing fire alarms to go off notifying the fire department, and leaving water running in the bathtub, which lead to several floods of his apartment requiring new flooring and carpeting.

National supremacy refers to the idea that when there is a conflict between a state law and a federal law, the federal law takes precedence. It comes from the Supremacy Clause in Article Six, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution. The clause makes the United States Constitution, its treaties, and its federal laws the highest laws in the land.

This “anti-commandeering” rule states that Congress does not have the power to pass laws that require state officials to implement or enforce federal laws. Stevens dissented, stating that the logic behind the ruling was inconsistent with the supremacy clause of the constitution. This challenge against the federal authority had no clear footing since there is no principle within the Constitution stating that the federal courts cannot commandeer states. In addition, this practice has also already been settled for over a century where state courts were frequently commandeered to carry out federal policies and laws such as during the New Deal. The anti-commandeering rule also proved to be dangerous as it may threaten the nation’s ability to respond effectively during times of external invasion or natural disasters. “It also impairs the the efficient administration of ordinary federal programs” (15). The anti-commandeering rule brings back the separate spheres of powers seen in dual federalism. However, in an era where cooperative federalism has been established for decades, the anti-commandeering rule becomes illogical. Stevens suggests that adding the four words “and other public officials” to the Supremacy Clause in Article VI of the Constitution would resolve this issue.

Higher courts help to ensure that federal law carries out evenly among all states; a message of unity isn't sent when each state has its own exceptions to the law. Higher courts also look at the overall picture and the impact that the law has; the point is that federal law is the main concern, and state law doesn’t make much difference. Therefore, it is necessary for the higher courts to step in and ensure that any issues at a federal level reign the same in any court/lower judicial system.

As a Federalist, Marshall exerted great influence over the other members of the Court to support federal supremacy over state sovereignty. The Supreme Court's decision in Gibbons used the Interstate Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8,Clause 3), Article I, Section 9, and the Supremacy Clause to prevent states from subordinating the federal government to state laws. The Marshall Court tended to fall to the nationalist definition of federal power, implying that federal law had power over that of the states. While many saw this as doubting state rights, the Court's decisions usually benefited the whole of the nation, whereas state statutes were designed to benefit and create income only for the individual state. The ruling in Gibbons v. Ogden

The history of the United States has long been peppered by the conflict regarding the distribution of power between states and the federal government. The Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution governs the relationship and authority of the state and federal governments through the concept of mutually exclusive and concurrent power. This is apparent in its explication, stating that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people” (Legal Information Institute). However, though this amendment serves as the apparent definition for state-federal relations, the power of government is a highly controversial source of discourse between

The main provisions that protect tenants from illegal eviction and harassment are now contained in the PEA 1977, as amended by various housing provisions, in particular