Federal Government | Coursehero Helper

I need help with a History question. All explanations and answers will be used to help me learn.

Discussion 1 page and half

Read through the chapter and familiarize yourself with the organization, purpose and power of the U. S. Constitution. When you’re done, you can visit the George Washington exhibit (Links to an external site.)to further clarify your understanding of the various arguments debated by each delegate. As the constitution is over 200 years old, discuss whether or not the argument over Federal Supremacy vs. State Sovereignty is still relevant. Explain why. Use examples from current events in the news to substantiate your argument.

Hint: The federal governments’ rules take “supremacy” over states “sovereignty”. However the two (federal govt and state govt) don’t always see things the same way, for example immigration law, legalization of marijuana, healthcare, gun laws etc. Every state doesn’t carry the same laws on the books, and they not only differ from each other, but states often differ from the federal government. Which should take precedence federal or state laws? And why?

Response half a page

Respond to this comment do you agree or disagree? Reply with supporting information

Although the constitution is over 200 years old, the argument of federal supremacy vs state sovereignty is still relevant today. It is still relevant because although the issues that we face today aren’t exactly the same as those that the founders did, there are still disagreements between federal and local state governments.

The argument of federal supremacy vs state sovereignty still stands strong today because state governments don’t always see eye to eye with federal laws and they feel that they need to protect their rights. An example of this relates to the legalization of marijuana. Although marijuana is completely legal in 10 states and the District of Columbia, it is still illegal in most states and has a mixed legal status in other states (Disa, 2020). Individual states can decide whether or not marijuana is legal, however, under federal government, it is still illegal. Due to this fact, although marijuana may be legal in a certain state, the federal government can still prosecute people for marijuana. Another example of federal supremacy vs state sovereignty relates to abortion. Under federal law, abortion is legal in the United States (Roe v. Wade), but states can place certain restrictions on it. Some ways that states have restricted abortion are by restricting insurance coverage of it, by creating TRAP laws which place medically unnecessary requirements on abortion providers, by banning abortions after a certain week of pregnancy, and by creating waiting periods (Planned Parenthood, 2020). Despite the fact that these abortion laws infringe upon a woman’s “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” they are legal. I believe that federal laws should take precedence over state laws, except if it infringes upon a person’s constitutional rights of “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness”. I think that the federal laws should take precedence over state laws because state laws might be subject to partisanship. For example, in more conservative states the laws might be more restrictive and they might discriminate against certain groups. Furthermore, i think that federal laws should take precedence over state laws because federal laws have been agreed upon by the three branches of government and they are upheld by the Supreme Court as the law of the land.

2.The Argument over Federal Supremacy vs. State Sovereignty is still relevant. Federal Supremacy would give the government a far reach. It would almost make the Government of the states irrelevant. The argument that the people ” feared that a strong national government might become too powerful and use its authority to oppress citizens and deprive them of their rights”.(op1). What this means is that it would be too easy with federal Supremacy for the government to lead into tyranny . In this kind of establishment it may also take the government longer to respond to its citizens. In contrast, a State Sovereignty would”[are ] believed to be better able to understand and protect the needs and interests of their residents” (op2). This means that a State Sovereignty would have closer access to its people and can respond better to what they need and want. It would be a faster more centralized process of bettering the state. This argument is relevant because it is still happening today in our government. A great example of this is with the current situation of the crono-virus. The federal government wanted to send some infected residents to the state of California. The state of California in court said, ““The Defendants’ [Federal Governments] plan was announced at the eleventh hour, with no efforts to include local government leaders or local public health officials,” the city said in its lawsuit. “The Plaintiffs now seeks to prevent Costa Mesa from becoming ground zero to a state and potentially nation-wide public health crisis caused because the state and federal governments have not sought to include local officials and emergency personnel in the planning and execution of their efforts”(Twp). This means that the state government has filed a lawsuit against the federal government for a variation of slights including misinformation.

As a resident I believe generally that the State laws should take precedence to the federal government. One main reason is in this exact case is the federal government has had years to plan for emergencies like the crono-virus. Sadly for some, I don’t want the crono-virus to consume California. State laws should take precedence to curb the power of the federal government. In this case of the crono-virus, the federal government would be far away and leave the citizens of California to “fend for themselves” in a pandemic. A state knows its residents better that the federal government ever can. Therefore a state should retain the precedence over its residents more so than the federal government.

Works Cited

*Note: When asked to use examples from current events, my expectation is for you to cite current news articles and then to cite your source. This is required in college as to avoid plagiarizing other authors work. Be sure that you’ve cited your sources!!