keywords:
Bookmark and Share



Front Back
Why are some of the powers listed in the Constitution exclusively federal powers? (meaning the states don't have them)
A). because of express constitutional limitation on or prohibition of the States' exercise thereof of those certain powers.

i.e. States don't have the treaty power, power to coin money and/or power to place duties on imports
The federal government has exclusive powers that the states don't have because of both...?
1. Express Constitutional limitations on the States (i.e. states can't coin money).

AND

2. Some power are inherently federal (i.e. power to declare, borrow money for U.S.)
The Federal government has two types of powers that are exclusive to the federal government (i.e. the states can't exercise them). What are they
1. powers that the states are expressly prohibited from exercising in the Constitution (i.e. coining money)

2. powers that are inherently federal (i.e. power to declare war, naturalization).

Any state exercise of these powers would subvert the federal system.
On the bar eame, you should not allow states to take actions that might touch upon...what?
A). foreign relations
The federal government has only those powers granted to it by the constitution, BUT, the state governnments are governments of _____________, having all powers that are not _______________

2. What amendment is this found in?

3. Of what practical effect is this given the expansive interpretation of federal powers (e.g. commerce power)
1. unlimited powers

2. prohibited to them by the Constitution

3. The 10th amenmdnet which provides that all powers not delegated to the feds are reserved to the states

4. little state power is exclusive.
True or False. The 10th amendment reads that all powers not delegated to the feds are reserved to the states. This has effectively made states have many powers exclusive to the states and much more powerful than the federal government in many respects.
1. False. because of the expansive interpretation of federal powers, little state power is exclusive and the federal government is very powerful.
True or False. Little State power is exclusive despite the 10th amendment granting them unlimited powers and the federal government being only granted the powers listed in the Constitution.
A). True. The reality is that Most governmetnal power is concurrent, beloning both to the states and the federal government.
Because of the exapnsive interpretation of federal powers, most governmental power is ____________,
A). Concurrent, belonging to both the states and the federal government.
Because most governmental power is concurrent between both the states and the federal government, it is possible for states and the federal governement to pass legislation on the same subject matter.

When this occurs, what happens?
A). The Supremacy Clause provides that the federal law is SUPREME AND the conflicting state law is rendered void.
Under the Supremacy Clause __________________ or _______________ supersedes any state or local action that actually conflicts with it.
1. A valid Act of Congress

OR

2. A Federal Regulation
When does a state or local rule actually conflict with a federal rule (statute OR regulation)?
A State or local Rule actually conflicts with a federal rule IF:

1. The State or local rule commands conduct that is inconsistent with that conduct required by the federal rule

OR

2. The state or local rule forbids conduct that the federal rule is designed to foster/encourage
A State or local Rule actually conflicts with a federal rule IF:

1. The State or local rule commands conduct that is inconsistent with that conduct required by the federal rule

OR

2. The state or local rule forbids conduct that the federal rule is designed to foster/encourage


If this happens the state or local rule is void under the supremacy clause
There are three ways in which a state or local rule can be preempted by a federal rule and trigger the supremacy clause that will render the state or local rule void. What are they?
1. Actual Conflict Preemption: If a state or local rule actually conflicts with a federal rule by either I. commanding conduct inconsistent with the federal rule or II. forbidding conduct that the federal rule is designed to "foster"/take care of/encourage

2. Objective Conflict Preemption; If a state or local rule interferes/prevents the achievement of a federal objective (true even if the law was made for a valid purpose and not just to frustrate the federal law)

AND/OR

3."Field" PreemptionThe state or local law does not conflict with federally regulated conduct or objectives, BUT Congress intended to "occupy"/have jurisdiction over the entire field that the state or local rule intervenes on, thus precluding any state or local regulation.
There does not have to be an actual conflcit related to the rule's conduct for the supremacy clause to make a state or local rule void. It is sufficient if the state or local law....What?
A). interferes with or prevents the achievement of a federal objective.

This is true even if the state or local law was enacted for some valid purpose and not just to frustrate the federal law.
The City of Clevleand passes a law for a valid purpose but it prevents the achievement of a Federal Regulation. What result?
A). The Supremacy Clause makes the Cleveland law void because it conflicts with the federal rule by preventing the acheivement of a federal objective.
What is federal preemption?
The Displacement of State or Local Law by Federal Law under the Supremacy Clause
1. Under the Supremacy Clause, A federal law that conflicts with a state or local law will...

2. Hence, state or local laws that conflict with Federal laws are, What?
1. Trump, or "pre-empt" that state law.

2. "without effect"
How can Congress or the Executive branch indicate that they intend for their federal rule to pre-empt state or local rules?
1. Through a statute or regulation's express language

OR

2. Through a statute or regulation's structure and purpose
1. Under the theory of Field Preemption...what happens?

2. A state or local law will be invalidated because of field prevention if?
A). Even without a conflict between federal and state law or an express provision for preemption, the courts will infer an intention to preempt state law if the federal regulatory scheme is so pervasive as to “occupy the field” in that area of the law, i.e. to warrant an inference that Congress did not intend the states to supplement it. 2. The state or local law attempts to regulate a field in which Congress or the Executive branch did not intend to allow states or localities to regulate.
If Congress passes a law that intends to cover an entire regulatory field, what result if a state or local law gets passed that regulates that field.
A). The state law is invalidated/pre-empted because Congress intended to regulate the entire field thus precluding any state or local reguation.
A Federal law or regulation may expressly preempt state law. BUT, an express preemption clause (saying state law on the matter/attempting to regulate the field) will be....what?
A). narrowly construed.
Federal law gives both state and federal courts jurisdiciton to hear claims for violations of federal righst committed by person acting understate law.

New York didn't like this because it determineed that the majority of suits seeking money damages from corrections officers under this law were frivolous.

Thus, the state divested its state trial courts of jurisdiction to hear cases under that federal law

What result?
A). This action violates the supremacy clause because the state law divesting jurisdiction from state trial courts actually conflicts with the federal law which commands that state trial courts must hear such cases.

Consequently, state trial courts must follow the federal law and hear the federal claims.

State courts may apply their own procedural rules as they do to state claims but they cannot exclude a class of federal claims from being heard in state court.
One purpose of the federal bankruptcy laws is to give bankrupt people a fres start, free of their old debts.

Ohio passes a law providing for the suspension of the driver's license of persons who have failed to pay of auto accident judgments, regardless of the judgment debtor's discharg in bankruptcy.

Is this state law valid?
A). No because the state law conflicts with Federal bankruptcy law by interfering with a federal objective...to give bankrupts a new start.

The state law is void under the supremacy class and without effect.
A federal law provides that "no requirement or prohibition based on smoking and health shall be imposed under state law with respect to the advertising or promotion of any cigarettes" that are labeled in confromity with federal law.

A smoker brings a state law consumer fraud claim against a cigarette company, claiming that the company's advertisements that its cigarettes were "light" and contain less tar and nicotine were fraudulent.

The cigarette company argued that its advertisements were in conformity with federal law and therefore the state law was preempted by federal law.

What result?
A). The state law claim is not preempted because it is a consumer protection claim that is based in duty not to deceive consumers and not on smoking or health as the federal law was.

The federal law preempts only state laws based on smoking and health.

Hence, the federal law does not preempt the state law consumer protection claim.
When does Express Preemption occur; that is...when does a Federal Law expressly preempt a state or local law?
Express preemption occurs only when a federal statute explicitly confirms Congress's intention to preempt state law.

BUT

"If a federal law contains an express pre-emption clause, it does not immediately end the inquiry because the question of the substance and scope of Congress’ displacement of state law still remains.
When does Implied Preemption Occur?
implied preemption can occur in two ways:

1. field preemption: that is, a state or local rule is invalidated by the supremacy clause because The Courts infer that Congress intended to pre-empt state or local rules because the federal regulatory scheme "occupies the entire field" in that area of law.

2. conflict preemption. This occurs where a state or local rule..

I. actually conflicts with a federal rule (it is impossible to comply with both the state and federal regulations)

OR

II. the state law interposes an obstacle to the achievement of Congress's discernible objectives...that is the state or local rule prevents/frustrates the achievement of the federal objectives.
If the federal law does not specifically indicate whether a state law should be preempted, what will the courts do?
A). Try to deduce/infer whether Congress intended for the law to preempt state or local law.
The Courts will often infer (where Congress is not clear), that a federal law preempts state and/or local law, if.
1. the Federal law(s) passed by Congress are comprehensive

And/Or

2. The Law creates a federal agency to oversee the field/area.
If,

1. Congress does not expressly say that a law they passed is supposed preempt state law

And

2. the field the federal law covers is one traditionally within the power of the states (e.g. regulations involving health, safety, or welfare)

The Court will do what???
presume that the historic state police powers are NOT to be superceded by the Federal law unless...

it was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress to supercede those traditional state police powers.
In all preemption cases, the Court will start with the presumption that,
the traditional/historic state police powers are NOT to be suprceded/preempted by federal law UNLESS that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress for those traditional state police powers to be preempted by the federal law.
A State or Local Rule Conflicts with a federal rule IF:
1. actual conflict; if the state or local rule actually conflicts with the state law...meaning that it is impossible to comply with both the state/local rule and the federal rule

OR

2. Objective Conflict; The state/local rule conflicts with the federal rule's objective. This occurs when the state law interposes an obstacle to the achievement of Congress's discernible objectives within the federal rule.
What has to happen for a federal law to expressly preempt a state law that actually conflicts with the federal law?
1. Congress passes a law that explicitly says that State's cannot pass a certain type of law (i.e. states can make a law prohibiting the advertising of smoking)

And

2. A state passes a law that is impossible to comply with and also comply with the federal law

(i.e. state passes a law prohibiting advertisement of cigarettes. Can't comply with both federal and state law)

Supremacy Clause is triggered and the state law is invalid.
Express Preemption occurs where?
a federal statute explicitly confirms Congress's intention to preempt state law.

i.e. Congress passes law saying that States cannot make a certain law
x of y cards