Balancing national and state power in the Constitution 75Balancing National and State Power in the Constitution
Although the Founders wanted a national government that was stronger than
it had been under the Articles of Confederation, they also wanted to preserve states’
autonomy. These goals are reflected in different parts of the Constitution, which
provides ample support for advocates of both state-centered and nation-centered
federalism. The nation-centered position has its roots in the document’s preamble,
which begins: “We the People of the United States.” The Articles of Confederation,
by contrast, began with the words: “We the undersigned delegates of the States.”
The Constitution’s phrasing emphasizes the nation as a whole over the separate
states.A Strong National Government
Most of the Founders wanted a strong national government to provide national security
and a healthy and efficient economy, so they included various powers in the Constitution
that supported the nation-centered perspective. In terms of national security, as
we saw in Chapter 2, Congress was granted the power to raise and support armies,
declare war, and “suppress Insurrections and repel Invasion,” while the president, as
commander in chief of the armed forces, would oversee the conduct of war. Congress’s
power to regulate interstate commerce promoted economic efficiency and centralized
an important economic power at the national level. The Constitution outlines
restrictions on state power that contribute to the centralization of national military and
economic power: states were prohibited from entering into “any Treaty, Alliance, or
Confederation” or keeping troops or “Ships of War” during peacetime. They also could
not coin money or impose duties on imports or exports (see Article I, Section 10).
The necessary and proper clause (Article I, Section 8) was another broad grant of
power to the national government: it gave Congress the power “[t]o make all Laws
which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers.”
Similarly, the national supremacy clause (Article VI) says that the Constitution and all
laws and treaties that are made under the Constitution shall be the “supreme Law of
the Land” and that “the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the
Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” This is perhaps the
clearest statement of the nation-centered focus of the Constitution. If any state law or
constitution conflicts with national law or the Constitution, the national perspective
wins. Thus, in the case of same-sex marriages, once the Supreme Court ruled that all
laws prohibiting same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, elected officials at all levels
knew that if they enacted new prohibitions, the laws would be immediately invalidated
by the courts.
You might be thinking, “Wait a minute, if the Constitution and the federal
government always win, how can local governments act as sanctuary cities even
though the Trump administration opposes them?” The answer is that there is no
constitutional provision or law that gives the federal government control over local
law enforcement. The same is true in many other policy areas. As we will see, when
conflicts between the federal and local governments arise, the federal government
can try to persuade local governments by offering grants or other forms of aid to
induce cooperation, but it cannot simply order local governments to comply with
its wishes.EXPLAIN WHAT THE
CONSTITUTION SAYS
ABOUT FEDERALISMUnder the Articles of
Confederation, all13
states had their own
militia and navy.DID YOU KNOW?
Full_04_APT_64431_ch03_070-101.indd 75 16/11/18 1:28 PM