Role of federalism in administrative law
Role of Federalism in Administrative Law
What is Federalism?
Federalism is a system of government in which powers are divided between a central (federal) government and regional (state/provincial) governments. Each level has its own set of powers, often enshrined in a constitution, to govern within their jurisdictions.
What is Administrative Law?
Administrative law governs the activities of administrative agencies of government, including their powers, procedures, and actions.
How Federalism Influences Administrative Law:
Division of Powers:
Federalism mandates a constitutional division of powers between federal and state governments.
Administrative agencies created by either level operate within their jurisdictional limits.
Agencies must respect the constitutional boundaries; they cannot exercise power beyond their allocated sphere.
Inter-Governmental Relations:
Federal and state administrative agencies often interact and collaborate.
Conflicts can arise over jurisdictional overlap, requiring judicial interpretation.
Checks and Balances:
Federalism ensures a check on administrative power by distributing authority.
Courts can invalidate administrative decisions that exceed constitutional powers.
Dual Systems of Law:
Each government level has its own administrative laws and agencies.
This can lead to parallel regulatory regimes, influencing individuals and businesses differently.
Conflict Resolution:
Courts play a critical role in resolving conflicts between federal and state administrative agencies.
Detailed Case Law on Federalism and Administrative Law
1. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) (U.S. Supreme Court)
Facts:
Maryland attempted to tax the Second Bank of the United States, a federal institution.
The bank refused to pay the tax.
Decision:
Chief Justice Marshall held that the federal government has implied powers beyond those explicitly stated in the Constitution.
Maryland could not tax the federal bank because “the power to tax involves the power to destroy.”
Established federal supremacy over state laws that conflict with federal powers.
Role in Administrative Law & Federalism:
This case affirms the supremacy of federal laws and agencies over conflicting state actions.
Federal administrative agencies operate with powers that cannot be nullified by states.
2. R v. Boucher (1951) (Canadian Supreme Court)
Facts:
A provincial administrative body penalized an individual for comments considered "seditious."
The individual challenged the limits of provincial administrative power.
Decision:
The court ruled that the provincial administrative tribunal cannot exceed the powers granted by the constitution.
It emphasized the importance of respecting the federal division of powers.
Role in Administrative Law & Federalism:
Ensures provincial administrative bodies do not overreach into federal jurisdiction.
Protects individual rights against misuse of administrative power in a federal context.
3. United States v. Lopez (1995) (U.S. Supreme Court)
Facts:
The U.S. Congress enacted the Gun-Free School Zones Act.
Alfonso Lopez was charged with carrying a gun on school property.
Decision:
The Supreme Court held the law was unconstitutional as it exceeded Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause.
This was a limitation on federal administrative and legislative authority in favor of state powers.
Role in Administrative Law & Federalism:
Emphasizes limits on federal administrative agencies when regulating areas traditionally under state control.
Reinforces the principle that federalism limits federal administrative power.
4. New York v. United States (1992) (U.S. Supreme Court)
Facts:
The federal government required states to either regulate or take ownership of radioactive waste.
New York challenged the law as coercive.
Decision:
The Court held that the federal government cannot compel states to enact or administer federal regulatory programs.
It distinguished between encouragement (permissible) and coercion (impermissible).
Role in Administrative Law & Federalism:
Sets limits on the extent to which federal agencies can influence state administrative action.
Protects states’ sovereignty in administrative matters.
5. Attorney-General of Canada v. Law Society of British Columbia (1982)
Facts:
A federal statute conflicted with provincial regulation of lawyers.
Decision:
The Supreme Court of Canada held the provincial regulatory scheme was valid and that federal legislation could not override provincial jurisdiction except where constitutionally authorized.
Role in Administrative Law & Federalism:
Affirms provincial administrative authority over professions.
Reinforces the division of powers and concurrent jurisdiction.
6. Hodge v. The Queen (1883) (Canada)
Facts:
Addressed provincial regulation of taverns and licensing laws.
Decision:
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council held that provinces have broad powers to regulate local matters including administration of licensing.
Role in Administrative Law & Federalism:
Validated provincial administrative powers within their jurisdiction.
Reaffirmed federalism’s role in limiting the reach of federal administrative authority.
7. California v. United States (1992)
Facts:
Dispute over federal water projects and state control of water resources.
Decision:
The Supreme Court held federal agencies’ authority could be limited by state interests in managing natural resources.
Role in Administrative Law & Federalism:
Showed the balance between federal administrative projects and state sovereignty.
Reinforced cooperative but distinct administrative roles.
Summary Table
| Case | Jurisdiction | Federalism Principle | Outcome & Role in Admin Law |
|---|---|---|---|
| McCulloch v. Maryland | U.S. | Federal supremacy | Federal agencies immune to state interference |
| R v. Boucher | Canada | Limits on provincial power | Provincial agencies cannot exceed constitutional limits |
| U.S. v. Lopez | U.S. | Limits on federal power | Federal agencies cannot regulate beyond constitutional authority |
| New York v. U.S. | U.S. | Anti-coercion doctrine | Federal cannot compel states in administrative programs |
| AG Canada v. Law Society BC | Canada | Provincial jurisdiction | Provinces control professional regulation |
| Hodge v. The Queen | Canada | Provincial regulatory power | Validates provincial administrative authority |
| California v. U.S. | U.S. | Federal-state balance | Limits on federal agency projects respecting state rights |
Conclusion
Federalism is a fundamental principle shaping administrative law by:
Dividing administrative powers between federal and state/provincial governments,
Limiting overreach by administrative agencies,
Preserving the autonomy of states or provinces,
Requiring courts to interpret and balance powers carefully.
This division ensures a check against centralization of administrative power and fosters cooperation between levels of government.
RELATED Blog
0 comments