Constitutional Law August 31, 2004

1
Constitutional LawAugust 31, 2004

• Overview
• Current Commerce Power Doctrine
• The Lopez Restatement
• Categories of Regulation
• Substantial Effects
• Improper Means
• State Sovereignty
• No Commandeering Rule
• Sovereign Immunity

2
Recap Current CC Doctrine

• Use of Channels
• Instrumentalities Of Persons/Things In
• Substantial Effects On
• Economic vs. Non Economic (Aggregate)
• Jurisdictional Requirement
• Findings Regarding Relevant Effects
• Traditional State Police Power Area

3
V. Improper MeansA. State Sovereignty

• Sovereignty Not Subject To Higher Power
• Dual Sovereignty
• Federal Law is Supreme
• But States Retain Sovereignty
• Protection of State Sovereignty
• Regulation of States (No-Commandeering)
• Remedies vs. States (Sovereign Immunity)

4
B. The No-Commandeering Rule1. Regulation of
States as States

• Forms of Regulation (link)
• FLSA Cases
• Wirtz permissible
• Usery (overruling Wirtz) impermissible
• Garcia (overruling Usery) permissible
• Key Points of Garcia
• Political Process Reasoning
• Possible Exceptions
• Dissents

5
2. Commandeering States

• Distinguish Garcia (link)
• New York v. United States
• Compelled Legislation
• No Commandeering Rule
• -- Historical Argument
• -- Political Process Argument
• 10th Am. as Mirror Image

If a power invades state sovereignty, then it is
necessarily a power the Constitution has not
conferred on Congress.
6
c. Printz v. United States

• The Brady Act Executive Officers
• Historical Practice
• Rationales from NY v.US
• Separation of Powers

7
3. Scope of N.C. Rule

• Branches of state government
• Legislature Applies (NY v. US)
• Executive Applies (Printz)
• Judiciary Does Not Apply (NY v. US)
• Compelled implementation, not
• General federal mandates (Garcia)
• Prohibition of action (Reno v. Condon)
• Other federal powers
• Conditional Spending OK (NY v. U.S)
• Reconstruction Amendments (?)

8
C. State Sovereign Immunity1. Background

• SI Generally (link)
• 11th Amendment
• Chisolm v. Georgia Response
• Suits by Citizens (Hans v. Louisiana)
• Suits vs. Officers (Ex parte Young)
• Abrogation
• 14th Amendment (Fitzpatrick)
• Commerce Power? (Seminole Tribe)

9
2. Alden and Its Progeny

• Federal vs. State Court
• 11th Amendment applies to federal courts
• Federal Suit in State Court?
• Alden
• Cant abrogate immunity in state court
• 11th Amendment Background
• SI as Constitutional Premise
• Article I powers Limited by Constitution

10
3. SI Exceptions

• Injunctive relief against officers
• Ex Parte Young
• No money damages or equivalent
• Waiver as a spending condition
• Must be clearly expressed
• Increasing importance
• Abrogate immunity under the 14th Am.
• Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer
• Must be clearly expressed

11
Form of Federal Regulation
Direct Regulation
States as States
Commandeering
Fed
Fed
Fed
People
States
People
States
People
Return
Return 2
12
State Sovereign Immunity Background

• Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) Diversity
  Jurisdiction Includes Suits Against States.
• 11th Amendment (1798) The Judicial Power of the
  United States shall not be construed to extend to
  any suit . . . Commenced or prosecuted against
  one of the United States by Citizens of another
  State . . .
• Hans v. Louisiana (1890) 11th Amendment also
  applies to suits against a state by its own
  citizens arising under federal law.
• Ex Parte Young (1908) Suits against state
  officers for injunctive relieve are not barred by
  the 11th Amendment.
• Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer (1976) Congress may
  abrogate immunity when acting pursuant to the
  14th Amendment.
• Pennsylvania v. Union Gas (1989) Congress may
  abrogate immunity when acting pursuant to the
  commerce power.
• Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida (1996)
  Congress may abrogate immunity when acting
  pursuant to the commerce power (overruling Union
  Gas).