It is False, just put the answer and move on. Trust me.
Federal supremacy and preemption refers to the idea that all state and local laws must not conflict with federal law. If there is a conflict, the federal law is considered the supreme law and it always supersedes the state or local law. An example would be if there was no state law prohibiting the dumping of toxic waste into a river, but there are federal laws prohibiting water pollution, then the federal law would take precedence and the dumping has to be stopped and the river has to be cleaned up. The only way to effectively overcome federal supremacy is to demonstrate that the federal law is in itself unconstitutional and therefore illegal. In that case, the federal law would be struck down by the court, and the state law would be the authority.
In a federal system, the National government holds significant power, but the smaller political subdivisions also holds significant power. The United States, Canada, Australia, and Brazil are some examples of federal systems. The balance Of power is something that will always be in debate.
Rule of Law
(Ensure that federal law always supersedes state law.)
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
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.