Constitution & Federal and State Laws.?

Question

OK, im making a thesis on the constitution.
It goes
"Although the constitution was made to settle the conflict of whcih is heavier, federal or state law, it failed to resolve the problem."
Can anyone revise it or make it better or suggest a new one??

and my examples to my thesis are the Civil War (a fight between state and federal law, wherther you can seceed or not) and the amnedment which states if it is left out in the constitution, it is a state or personal right.

I need 1+ more examples in which federal law and state law come in conflict with eachother.

Answer 1

Marijuana issue between California and federal law.
Commerce Clause

Answer 2

A heavy area....I'm thinking this is for a high school or college paper, so you shouldn't make it too complicated. What you have for a thesis so far, probally isn't very good, because the premise is faulty: The constituion was not created to settle which law was supreme, rather it created a system whereby there were two sets of laws people live under: State law and Federal law.

As for a better thesis, how about:

Athough the consitution was made to create limited federal laws in comparison to state laws, a strong federal legal system has come about.

Examples:

Salvery was orginally legal, but was eventually made illegal by federal law.

Originally, the bill of rights only applied to federal laws, now most apply to state laws. Look up the "incorporation doctrine", there's lots on it.

There are strong federal drug laws, etc.

Good luck.

Answer 3

You are talking about the tenth amendment in the bill of rights that reserved state power if there is no direct federal act.

Sounds simple but it isn't. Commerce clause issues have allowed the feds to eat away at state rights. In the begining of our nation, the states feared a powerful federal government above all else (federal government was the same as a monarchy). Therefore, the federal government was to remain relatively weak to prevent such a disaster to occur. As we have grown as a nation, we have become aware that a weak federal government is not what is needed to promote growth and protect the nation. Therefore additional amendments have been added and the constitution has been interpreted to meet the needs of an expanding nation with a need for strong federal government.

I know there are those that would argue that the federal government is too powerful and needs to be brought back to it's roots. I must disagree. I doubt it would be very wise to fight a global war on terrorisim with 50 different state militas. Many states can't fund their public schools, roads or other important public projects without federal tax dollars.

The federal government cannot directly force a state to enact any law. The way they get around it is by offering money to pay for projects but with strings attached to enact the laws. Examples: drinking age 21, DUI limit .08, speed limits. The feds tie highway money to these conditions.

I cannot agree with your thesis. The constitution was one of the greatest compromises in legislation ever written. It took years to get all the states to ratify the thing and even then it took the bill of rights to sell it all. It did not fail. We still look to it today to guide us as to what is right and wrong..

Answer 4

Actually, the thesis is flawed. Aside from the issue of secession (and most of the arguments for secession flows from the writings of the Anti-Federalists not from any of the actual Framers of the Constitution), the Constitution is crystal clear that federal law trumps state law when the two conflict. However, the Tenth Amendment leaves the states free to enact their own laws.

The basic concept is called preemption and there are numerous court cases dealing with the issue. Put in simplest terms, the doctrine of preemption says that Congress gets to decide if a federal statute preempts state laws. For example, many regulatory statutes (such as those governing warning labels on tobacco products) expressly prohibit states from adding additional requirements. In other areas, for example, criminal laws, there is no preemption as the jurisdiction of federal criminal courts and state criminal courts do not overlap in any way.

Answer 5

Federal state ultimately has the power to overrule state law. Take for example the recent Gonzales v. Raich court case. Raich was a terminally ill patient who was allowed, by state law, to grow and smoke medical marijuana within her home. However, because she was such a face of the issue of medical marijuana she was arrested by the federal government, on the basis that growing and smoking medical marijuana could be controlled under the commerce clause, and died in prison. You could also refer to the Gibbons v. Ogden case from 1824. Both were issued a monopoly on a boating business which crossed state lines, one at a state level and one at a federal level. Ultimately, the federal ruling overshadowed the state ruling. I would definitely revise your thesis, as actually the constitution was made to dictate FEDERAL laws, while states have their own individual constitutions to dictate state laws, and ultimately the federal court always has the final say. Hope that was helpful.

Answer 6

Maybe you'll listen to a democrat. Read the Constitution. The posters above me have given you some leads and you quote 8th grade civics. Son, as a teacher, I have to say you're source, compared to the primary documents, is a bit shaky. Read our founding documents, don't depend on a teacher to do it for you. Also, your political bigotry is not a good sign. Bring intelligent discourse here if you want respect from those of us who haven't joined the political bigotry you have so fully bought into. Yes, so have a lot of Republicans, but no one said we have a corner on that market. You're wasting our time with ego. I'm not better than you, can't be, but that doesn't mean we're going to stay silent when someone is insulting, rude, has no proof, no evidence, and doesn't even know the documents in question, has no rebuttal, and frankly seems to be trying to prop themselves up emotionally by insulting others. You're better than this. Join us. It's fun when you don't act in an unethical way, trust me. Keep speaking up, regardless. That's one of the things (free speech) I fought for. Won, too.

Answer 7

federal law trumps state law. I.E. legalized weed. Yes you can seceed by a vote of the people legally, Lincoln was a criminal in that matter

Answer 8

To add to the above, another good example of conflict is medical marijuana, where a state approves it and the feds try to prosecute individuals.

(I would change "heavier" to "which takes precedence" or something similar.)

Answer 9

the 14th amendment kinda screwed things up.

But Abortion is great contemporary issue that will server your needs