"Why Federalism Must Be Enforced: A Response to Professor Kramer" by Marci A. Hamilton
 

Publication Date

2001

Journal

Villanova Law Review

Abstract

The United States Supreme Court has issued a series of opinions that turn on the Constitution's inherent principles of federalism, decisions that have alarmed many a legal scholar. Some scholars have attacked the Court for overstepping its bounds, and others have criticized the Court on the ground that the federal/state balance should be maintained through the political process rather than judicial review. The most recent advocate of this position, Professor Larry Kramer, recently argued in the Columbia Law Review that the political party structure ensures that state interests are taken into account at the federal level, and therefore the Supreme Court need not and should not enforce federalism guarantees. This criticism of the judicial enforcement of federalism fails as a matter of constitutional history and on empirical grounds. The Supreme Court in this era deserves praise, not criticism, for its recent federalism jurisprudence.

Volume

46

Issue

5

First Page

1069

Last Page

1090

Publisher

Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law

Keywords

Federalism, Political Theories and Ideologies, Constitutional Law, Due Process, Fourteenth Amendment, Legal Practice and Procedure, Jurisdiction, Right to Travel, Tenth Amendment, State and Local Government Law

Disciplines

Constitutional Law | Fourteenth Amendment | Jurisdiction | Law | State and Local Government Law

Download

Share

COinS