Government Chapter 3

Front 1

South Dakota v. Dole (1987)

Back 1

S. Dakota took a constitutional challenge arguing that Congress could not use its spending authority to buy power in an area that the Constitution reserved for the states in response to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act- rather than imposing drinking age directly, Congress could bully states into increasing their own limits by yanking away money in federal highway funds. Rehnquist said that Congress can use the federal budget to expand its own influence. Also the court decided that both involve "highway safety"

Front 2

federalism

Back 2

the belief that multiple sources of government authority could coexist, each with its own sphere of responsiblity

Front 3

dual soverignty

Back 3

a theory of federalism by which both the national and state governments have final authority over their own policy domains

Front 4

nullification

Back 4

a doctrine that gives states the authority to declare acts of Congress unconstitional

Front 5

McCulloch v. Maryland

Back 5

decision of 1819 in which the Supreme Court declared unconsitutional the state's power to tax a federal government entity- declared that the language in supremacy clause gives it authority to strike down laws that violate the US constitution, McCulloch case revolved around the Bank of the US, an entity that commericial interests thought vital to economic prosperity but that many farmers and debtors resented. In response, maryland levied a steep tax on the bank. McCulloch refused to pay and took his case to the Supreme Court-decided that Maryland could not tax a federal bank.

Front 6

soverign immunity

Back 6

the legal doctrine protecting states from lawsuits filed under national legislation; in the 11th amendment

Front 7

10th Amendment

Back 7

emphasizes that states retain all powers not delegated specifically to the national government; the supreme court rarely invokes this provision

Front 8

New Deal

Back 8

a wide array of proposals expanding the federal government's power to stimulate economic recovery

Front 9

Wickard v.Filburn (1942)

Back 9

a farmer violated New Deal crop limits by sowing 23 acres of winter wheat on his land to feed his family and livestock. The supreme court ruled against his favor, their reasoning that his actions affected interstate commerce. If he did not "resort to the market", the farmer was depressing worldwide wheat prices

Front 10

cooperative (or marble cake) federalism

Back 10

the theory that all levels of government can work together to solve common problems

Front 11

categorical grants

Back 11

grants with fairly specific regulationa about how the money must be spent.

Front 12

block grants

Back 12

intergovernmental grants with a broad set of objectives, a minimum of restrictions and maximum discretion for local officials; republican support these, expanded in after Nixon's 1968 victory, beginning of the Reagan administration, and once after the 1994 election when Republicans captured control of Congress

Front 13

unfunded mandates

Back 13

which occur when the national government imposes regulations on state and local governments without covering the costs

Front 14

devolution

Back 14

the return of governmental responsibilities to state and local governments. after taking over congress, republicans passed a statue banning any new law that is not adequately funded

Front 15

United States v. Lopez (1995)

Back 15

Narrowed the scope of the commerce clause- Congress had attempted to set policy for public schools by declaring them gun free zones- an effort the national gov't justified by arguing that education was a "business" that influenced interstate commerece but the S. court ruled that federal legislation intruded into a policy that belonged to the states.

Front 16

New York v. United States (1992)

Back 16

S. Court also tried to limit the elasticity of the necessary and proper clause, the S. court declared that Congress cannnot give direct orders to states. Congress tried to regulate how states disposed of nuclear waste by imposing an unfunded mandate that required each state either to find an adequate burial site forits waste or to become legally responsible for the any damages the waste might cause.

Front 17

line-item veto

Back 17

a power that allows them to reject specific parts of a bill