Somewhere in the federal government, there must be a memo that outlines next steps should a state like Idaho defy a federal court order.
I'm ready for the feds to put these states in their place. For example, take away federal tax revenue until they comply. This entire states-rights chest-thumping show might please the locals, but they might not talk so tough in the face of extreme consequences.
Already in place, but in danger of not being applied.
Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/supremacy_clause
And
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Issue: Can Congress establish a national bank, and if so, can a state tax this bank?
Result: The Court held that Congress had implied powers to establish a national bank under the "necessary and proper" clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Court also determined that United States laws trump state laws and consequently, a state could not tax the national bank.
It worked during the 1973 oil crisis:: “The Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act was a bill in the U.S. Congress that included the National Maximum Speed Limit [55]. States had to agree to the limit if they desired to receive federal funding for highway repair.”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law
My question isn't about the well-established authority. It's about how the federal government enforces violations of the Supremacy Clause. So the feds sue a state like Idaho, and it wins a favorable judgment (though I wonder what this extreme right-wing Supreme Court would do). But Idaho persists in its defiance.
What's the enforcement mechanism then? Is there a precedent — beyond the Civil War?
Withhold federal funds? Just very quick search, old data from 2013, bet they can’t do w/out a third of their budget. “In 2013 Idaho got $2.6 billion dollars from the federal government, which is 34.4% of its total revenue.” https://www.nationalpriorities.org/smart/idaho/constructor/
Lots of talk of fear today in these comments. The media has done its job well. Blinders work well in ignoring the calls for fear. I just don't click on the fear mongering for money junk.
What’s the point of Idaho again? Snark aside red states have outsized power and I fear we aren’t safe for long in blue states.
Somewhere in the federal government, there must be a memo that outlines next steps should a state like Idaho defy a federal court order.
I'm ready for the feds to put these states in their place. For example, take away federal tax revenue until they comply. This entire states-rights chest-thumping show might please the locals, but they might not talk so tough in the face of extreme consequences.
Already in place, but in danger of not being applied.
Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/supremacy_clause
And
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Issue: Can Congress establish a national bank, and if so, can a state tax this bank?
Result: The Court held that Congress had implied powers to establish a national bank under the "necessary and proper" clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Court also determined that United States laws trump state laws and consequently, a state could not tax the national bank.
Importance: The McCulloch decision established two important principles for constitutional law that continue today: implied powers and federal supremacy. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/programs/constitution_day/landmark-cases/
It worked during the 1973 oil crisis:: “The Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act was a bill in the U.S. Congress that included the National Maximum Speed Limit [55]. States had to agree to the limit if they desired to receive federal funding for highway repair.”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law
My question isn't about the well-established authority. It's about how the federal government enforces violations of the Supremacy Clause. So the feds sue a state like Idaho, and it wins a favorable judgment (though I wonder what this extreme right-wing Supreme Court would do). But Idaho persists in its defiance.
What's the enforcement mechanism then? Is there a precedent — beyond the Civil War?
Withhold federal funds? Just very quick search, old data from 2013, bet they can’t do w/out a third of their budget. “In 2013 Idaho got $2.6 billion dollars from the federal government, which is 34.4% of its total revenue.” https://www.nationalpriorities.org/smart/idaho/constructor/
That would get their attention! As you probably know, many red states pay way less in federal taxes than they receive.
Thank you
Maybe not necessarily in ID, but corporations can certainly have an impact, as happened in NC a few years ago over the bathroom bill.
Shaf.
“I fear”.
Don’t Fear Shaf. Prepare.
Lots of talk of fear today in these comments. The media has done its job well. Blinders work well in ignoring the calls for fear. I just don't click on the fear mongering for money junk.