One of the conflicts we have in this country is the dispute over States vs the Federal Government authority.
When the constitution was adopted, it was somewhat clear that the States started with all the power and spelt out what powers they wanted the new Federal Government to have. Its pretty clear that any power not granted to the Feds stayed with the States or with the Citizens.
The Constitution cannot be amended without the consent of the States but Federal powers have grown over time, in some cases ratified by an amendment.
Between various laws and court opinions, we do see some interpretation creep in.
The general principle concerning the distribution of powers had to do with scope. If the item had multi-state implications, like interstate commerce, it became a federal responsibility. If it only had intrastate issues, it stayed with the states.
It would probably be a good idea to better define this rule. It has been interpreted multiple times. We also have added clauses to the constitution that impact individuals no matter what State they live in.
Our law is determined as much be precedent as it is by fiat. Maybe we need to codify all the precedent's and clarify the will of the people?
No comments:
Post a Comment