Introduction. South Dakota v Dole (1987) is a case that came about after a teenager was killed by a drunk driver. This caused
Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey
to push for legislation establishing a national drinking age of twenty-one.
Who brought the South Dakota v. Dole case to the Supreme Court and why?
Introduction. South Dakota v Dole (1987) is a case that came about after a teenager was killed by a drunk driver. This caused
Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey
to push for legislation establishing a national drinking age of twenty-one.
Who was involved in the South Dakota v. Dole case?
South Dakota, which allowed 19-year-olds to purchase (raised from 18 years old as result of NMDAA) beer containing up to 3.2% alcohol, challenged the law, naming
Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole
as the defendant.
How is the case of South Dakota v. Dole an issue of federalism?
South Dakota v. … Under the South Dakota v. Dole decision,
Congress can place conditions on the distribution of federal aid to states if those conditions are in the interest of general welfare
, legal under the state's constitution, and not overly coercive.
What was the dissenting opinion in South Dakota v. Dole?
The Supreme Court disagreed, saying
Congress can “indirectly” encourage uniformity among the states through spending power
, provided that the condition is “reasonably related” to the purpose of the funding, in pursuit of the “general welfare,” clearly defined, related to a national program or interest, and does not …
Why was US v Lopez unconstitutional?
United States v. Lopez, legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on April 26, 1995, ruled (5–4) that the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 was unconstitutional
because the U.S. Congress, in enacting the legislation, had exceeded its authority under the commerce clause of the Constitution
.
What is the anti commandeering doctrine?
The anti-commandeering doctrine, recently announced by the Supreme Court in New York v. … United States,
prohibits the federal government from commandeering state governments
: more specifically, from imposing targeted, affirmative, coercive duties upon state legislators or executive officials.
What are the four parts of the Dole test?
Dole – A Four-part Test –
Court, Congress, Power, and Drinking – JRank
Articles.
Is the minimum drinking age a federal law?
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 (23 U.S.C. § 158) was passed by the United States Congress and was later signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on July 17, 1984. … The minimum purchase and
drinking ages is a state law
, and most states still permit “underage” consumption of alcohol in some circumstances.
When did South Dakota change the drinking age?
South Dakota has a law raising the drinking age to 21 as
of April 1988
if its court test is unsuccessful. The other three states that have not raised their drinking age are Colorado, Ohio and Wyoming.
Which Supreme Court case had the greatest impact on federalism?
A Federalist Stronghold:
John Marshall's Supreme Court
.
Marbury v. Madison
was one of the most important decisions in U.S. judicial history, because it legitimized the ability of the Supreme Court to judge the consitutionality of acts of the president or Congress.
What cases deal with federalism?
- Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918) …
- South Dakota v. Dole (1987) …
- United States v. Lopez (1995) …
- United States v. Morrison (2000) …
- Raich v. Gonzalez (2005)
How is federalism defined?
Federalism is
a system of government in which the same territory is controlled by two levels of government
. … Both the national government and the smaller political subdivisions have the power to make laws and both have a certain level of autonomy from each other.
Would South Dakota violate anyone's constitutional rights by making the drinking age 21 in order to get the federal funds?
Pp. 483 U. S. 206-212. (a) Incident to the spending power, Congress may attach conditions on the receipt of federal funds. … Here, if South Dakota were to succumb to Congress' blandishments and raise its drinking age to 21, its action
would not violate anyone's constitutional rights
.
How did South Dakota v Dole 1987 refine the categorical grant process?
How did South Dakota v. Dole (1987) refine the categorical grant process?
The requirements must be for the general welfare of the public and not be ambiguous
; conditional grants cannot to use to induce state sot engage in unconstitutional activities.
What is the Spending Clause of the Constitution?
The Spending Clause
authorizes Congress to raise taxes and spend money “to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and the general Welfare of the United States
.” These words cannot possibly justify the modern doctrine that the term “general welfare” authorizes Congress to spend money for virtually any purpose …
