Document Type
Article
Media Type
Text
Abstract
This comment examines three decisions of the 1997 Supreme Court Term in which the Court invalidated Federal laws: Printz v. United States, City of Boerne v. Flores, and Reno v. ACLU. This comment looks for a unifying trend in the decisions in an effort to determine if the Court is moving in a new philosophical direction. The author suggests that the decisions do signal a renewed commitment to States' rights and federalism. Further, the decisions reveal the Court's antagonism toward the largess and enlarged scope of Congress. The author suggests that the decisions are an attempt by the Court to rein in the power of Congress.
First Page
411
Last Page
444
Publication Date
5-1-1998
Department
College of Law
ISSN
0734-1490
Language
eng
Publisher
Northern Illinois University Law Review
Recommended Citation
St. Clair, Melanie K.
(1998)
"A Return to States' Rights? The Rehnquist Court Revives Federalism,"
Northern Illinois University Law Review: Vol. 18:
Iss.
2, Article 1.
Suggested Citation
Melanie K. St. Clair, Comment, A Return to States' Rights? The Rehnquist Court Revives Federalism, 18 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 411 (1998).
