Federalism and the Commerce ClauseFederalismo y Commerce Clause
Congress bans racial discrimination in restaurants that serve food shipped from other states. A Dallas diner with only local customers challenges the law. Under Heart of Atlanta and its companion cases, the law is:
The 1964 Act rests on the commerce power precisely because the state action doctrine blocked the Fourteenth Amendment route.La ley de 1964 descansa en el poder de comercio justamente porque la doctrina de la acción estatal cerraba la vía de la Decimocuarta Enmienda.
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States; Katzenbach v. McClung (1964)
Congress makes it a federal crime to possess a knife within 500 feet of any school. Which argument best attacks the statute?
United States v. Lopez struck down the Gun-Free School Zones Act on this reasoning; the substantial effects test does not reach noneconomic local conduct.United States v. Lopez anuló la Gun-Free School Zones Act con este razonamiento; la prueba de los efectos sustanciales no alcanza la conducta local no económica.
United States v. Lopez (1995)
Congress orders every state legislature to enact a statute regulating the disposal of radioactive waste or else take title to the waste. This is:
The Tenth Amendment's anti-commandeering rule: Congress regulates people, not states as states, though it may offer conditional funds or preempt.La regla anti-commandeering de la Décima Enmienda: el Congreso regula a las personas, no a los estados como tales, aunque puede ofrecer fondos condicionados o desplazar su legislación.
New York v. United States (1992)
A man is acquitted of assault in a Texas court. Federal prosecutors then charge him under a federal civil-rights statute for the same beating. His double jeopardy claim:
Dual sovereignty: an offense against each sovereign is a separate offense (Gamble v. United States, 2019). Mexico's article 23 has no such exception.Doble soberanía: una ofensa contra cada soberano es un delito distinto (Gamble v. United States, 2019). El art. 23 CPEUM no tiene esa excepción.
Gamble v. United States (2019)
Congress may regulate the channels and instrumentalities of interstate commerce and activities that it; the states keep a general that the federal government lacks.
Two halves of federalism: enumerated federal power and residual state power.Dos mitades del federalismo: poder federal enumerado y poder estatal residual.
Compare the U.S. Tenth Amendment with article 124 of the Mexican Constitution in three sentences, including one practical difference.
AnswerRespuesta: Both reserve to the states (or the people) the powers not granted to the federal government, so the federal government is one of enumerated powers in both constitutions. In practice, U.S. federal power expanded through judicial interpretation of the Commerce Clause and the spending power, while Mexican federal power expanded through hundreds of amendments to article 73 that moved subjects (education, health, labor, crime) to the federal list. A second difference is that Mexican competences tend to be exclusive while many American ones are concurrent, which is why the United States needs a doctrine of preemption.
- same residual rule
- expansion by interpretation vs. by amendment
- concurrent powers and preemption