Constitutional Law Question

[Botany]

what part of the Constitution or amendments speaks to the fact that state or local governments can not
make laws that supersede the U.S. Constitution?

thanx

[ProdigalJunkMail]

1. Article VI, Clause 2

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.


OR the 14th :

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.

[elleng]

5. Beat me to it, Prodigal! Back to coffee!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

6. the caffeine is STRONG with this one ... n/t

[elleng]

7. and provides opportunity for some good discussions here, at DU, imo!

[melm00se]

2. Article IV, clause 2

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

[Shrek]

3. Article 6

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

[anigbrowl]

4. look up 'the supremacy clause'.

Article VI, clause 2. You should know this already, though.

[tekisui]

8. Article 6, the Supremacy Clause---Preemption.

The use of the supremacy clause depends on Preemption and whether the federal government has 'occupied the field'

Preemption

Congress may displace, or preempt, state law whenever it intends to and is acting within the scope of constitutionally enumerated powers. Three types of preemption:

Express Preemption—Congress has clearly declared its intent to preempt state law.

Conflict Preemption—occurs when courts determine that there is an actual conflict between state and federal law. An actual conflict is defined as whenever it is impossible to comply with both federal and state law or the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.

Impossibility of dual compliance—Example: Wisconsin required that syrup sold in Wisconsin be labeled in a certain fashion. The Federal Food and Drug Act of 1906 mandated different labeling for syrup. Ct. held that due to the impossibility of compliance with both federal and Wisconsin law, the state law was in actual conflict federal law and thus impliedly preempted by federal law. McDermott v. Wisconsin (1913).

State law as an obstacle—actual conflict on this basis will likely be found if the effect of the state law is to discourage conduct that federal action specifically seeks to encourage. Example: Ct. held that federal law preempted a provision of a state unemployment compensation scheme denying benefits to someone discharged from a job for filing an unfair labor practice charge with the federal National Labor Relations Board. Nash v. Florida Industrial Commission(1967)

Field Preemption—Field preemption occurs when courts determine that Congress impliedly intended to "occupy the field" so fully that it "left no room for the States to supplement it" This intent can be found in three ways:

Pervasive federal regulation—where the federal regulatory scheme consists of multiple and comprehensive laws governing virtually every activity within a given field, courts are likely to find field preemption.

Dominant federal interest—the Act of Congress may touch a field in which federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject. Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.(1947).

"Object and Character"—when the object sought to be obtained by federal law and the character of obligations imposed by it may reveal a congressional intent fully to occupy the field.

This was grabbed from a pdf, lost the link.

[Botany]

9. Thanx all!

Why google when you can use DU :rofl:

[ProdigalJunkMail]

10. google should have a 'snark' skin so it could be more like DU n/t