The federal government does not always intervene when there is a conflict because they choose not to. Their reasons for abstaining may differ, but they reserve the right. The best example of this is medical marijuana; it is illegal under federal law, but several states have legalized it. The federal government has intervened, but they don't really want to challenge the laws.
The correct answer is the Constitution...in the end the government always has to go to the source of governmental power, which is, the Constitution.
Yes, the states have no authority to countermand or nullify a federal warrant.
State courts have always had their own authority. In colonial times, each separate colony maintained its own government and tended to its own business legislatively and judicially. Thus, states already had judicial authority. There ws no federal government to superced state government in areas of federal concern as there is today. Before the US Constitution was created, the new United States operated under the Articles of Confederation. Under the Articles, states retained all of their original autonomy and authority especially with regard to judicial matters relating to their own legal matters. The US Constitution created a federal government that has only certain specific and limited powers that affected the states as a single country rather than as a group of individual state governments. The federal government's authority superseded state authority in those national areas but left state authority that did not conflict with the federal authority intact. Judicial matters that arose only under state law were left to the state courts to handle. In order to enforce federal law in a consistent manner from one state to another, the Constitution created federal judicial authority but it was only over federal matters such as issues that arose under federal law. These are referred to as "federal questions." Therefore, the Constitution simply allowed the states to retain their already existing judicial authority. This was accomplished in the Constitution in Article III, which created the federal judiciary and gave it authority over federal questions. The Tenth Amendment stated that all powers not given to the federal government were retained by the states. Since the Constitution did not take away state court authority over internal matters, state courts retained that authority.
The government is over reaching its authority by trying to do away with some things in the constitution. Some of the freedoms given there are not always being allowed by the government. They are stepping over the authority given to them when they do this.
Yes, the constitution states that the federal government is the primary government with states being second. Since 1789 there has always been the issue of state rights vs federal laws.
American has always had a federal govrnment.
they dont always get what they were expecting
federal law is always superior to state law
Federal government is in control of all the states within it's boundaries. Local government is a sub division of government which each state is in control of themselves. Even though local can set it's own laws, federal government can and will almost always override local laws.
Since a federal offense can mean any crime committed on U.S government property, and you can comment a misdemeanor on U.S. government property; it stands to reason that this misdemeanor would then be a federal offense.
There was no change of government on the federal side during the civil war. The Confederacy, of course, created their own government, but congress and the executive branch went along as always in the north.
Political environment is where the government bodies intervene in situations where society does not adhere to the governmental Acts, so therefore politically there always have to be some form of governance.
In the United States, the states have always regulated eligibility and validity of marriage. Only once before, in the issue of interracial marriage, did the federal government overrule states rights in this regard.
not always but most of the time yes. people often achieve what they want by using force against government (because government has power and authority)
The federal government is always growing to expand and contrast. It is a process that can never be replaced.
use your textbook its always helpful
Some would say the line of that relationship is being blurred from what our founding fathers intended. The federal government was originally formed to serve the states, but lately the states are being forced to server the federal government. The federal union was primarily formed to protect the member states from foreign invasion. Other duties that made sense were things such as regulation of interstate commerce. Other than that, each state was to regulate its own interests. Many now believe the federal government has overstepped its bounds. It attempts to regulate things such as education, that many believe should be left to the states. They require states to comply with federal mandates, often spending state money that is not reimbursed by the federal government (unfunded federal mandates). The relationship is in a state of change. It always has been. There always will be a struggle between the states and federal government for power.
1. to ensure information needed to keep the government running is always available
Federal student loans have no statute of limitations. The government can always try to collect.
It is False, just put the answer and move on. Trust me.
Yes, the government always gets paid first.