Federalism is the division of power that stands at the origin of the United States of America. This system implies elements of a unitary government and a confederation. In simple words, federalism is when the power and authority are divided between local governments and a central government. In the US’s case, it is divided by fifty state governments and the Washington national government. This work aims to analyze the Supreme Court’s Printz v. United States case and its major issues. This specific case is significant for understanding the United States of America’s type of government and power distribution.
The Printz v. United States case took place in the summer of 1997 and was related to the Tenth Amendment. It says that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people” (NCC Staff, 2022, para. 3). However, it is essential to know the background to understand the case and analyze it. A national system for checking on handgun applicants was established. It was required to implement such checks for local and state enforcement officers until the national system functions. However, the decree was challenged by several sheriffs and was declared unconstitutional by two district courts.
The Court of Appeals of the United States canceled its rulings and declared it constitutional, but it was instantly filed for the Supreme Court to review the case. Eventually, the Supreme Court decided to reverse its decision for the Ninth Circuit. This case stated that the temporary Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act violated the United States Constitution’s Tenth Amendment. This court’s decision strengthened the sovereignty of states and infixed the fact that the federal government has no right to implement federal programs in states.
The most significant issue of this case is Congress’ authority to accept temporary provisions and require states to carry out their program. As a result, it was declared unconstitutional to demand local governments check on firearm purchasers. It matters because in this case, the Supreme Court required state officials to background check on handgun applicants was a violation of the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. It is crucial to understand that “such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty” (NCC Staff, 2022, para. 5).
This argument about federalism was also present in recent controversies, including the state marijuana laws regulation, sports betting becoming legal, and sanctuary cities. The point of this issue is that Congress should not have the power to command states directly. One of the recent examples happened in New Jersey when they desired to legalize sports betting, even though such actions are prohibited by federal law. It is clear that the “power to issue direct orders to the governments of the States” is not present in the list of the Congress’s powers.
References
NCC Staff. (2022). On this day, the Supreme Court reinforces the 10th Amendment. National Constitution Center. Web.
done in as little as 1 hour