Award Date

1-1-2006

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Arts (MA)

Department

Political Science

First Committee Member

Jerry Simich

Number of Pages

112

Abstract

An interesting moment in Supreme Court history was the rise of William Rehnquist to Chief Justice in 1986. Under Rehnquist, the Court for the first time in nearly sixty years issued decisions that limited federal power. However, were the decisions indicative of the destruction of cooperative federalism and the Constitutional Revolution of 1937 or merely exercises limiting the excesses of federal power? This paper argues the latter. Recently, the Court further cemented their belief in cooperative federalism, while limiting its excesses where necessary in the cases of Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs (2003), Granholm v. Heald (2005), Gonzales v. Raich (2005), Kelo v. City of New London (2005), and Gonzales v. Oregon (2006). The Granholm, Raich and Kelo decisions were clear cooperative federalism victories; while Hibbs retreated from more stringent Eleventh and Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence and Oregon recognized the limitations of the federal government in the realm of police powers.

Keywords

Cases; Developments; Federal; Federalism; Recent; Relations; Selected; State

Controlled Subject

Political science; Law

File Format

pdf

File Size

3000.32 KB

Degree Grantor

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Language

English

Permissions

If you are the rightful copyright holder of this dissertation or thesis and wish to have the full text removed from Digital Scholarship@UNLV, please submit a request to digitalscholarship@unlv.edu and include clear identification of the work, preferably with URL.

Identifier

https://doi.org/10.25669/pluj-idqp


Share

COinS