Arizona State Lawmakers Want to Nullify All EPA Regulations

Arizona conservatives say the federal government has no authority to impose environmental regulations, but similar arguments elsewhere have foundered.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer points during an intense conversation with President Barack Obama after he arrived at Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2012, in Mesa, Ariz. Asked moments later what the conversation was about, Brewer, a Republican, said: "He was a little disturbed about my book." Brewer recently published a book, "Scorpions for Breakfast," something of a memoir of her years growing up and defends her signing of Arizona's controversial law cracking down on illegal immigrants, which Obama opposes. Obama was objecting to Brewer's description of a meeting he and Brewer had at the White House, where she described Obama as lecturing her. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)
National Journal
Jack Fitzpatrick
Add to Briefcase
Jack Fitzpatrick
Jan. 28, 2014, 5:40 a.m.

It’s no sur­prise when con­ser­vat­ive state law­makers in­voke the 10th Amend­ment to re­buke the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment, and it’s all too com­mon that Ari­zona tangles with the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion.

So it may have only been a mat­ter of time be­fore Ari­zona law­makers did both at the same time.

On Monday, 37 Ari­zona state law­makers in­tro­duced a bill aim­ing to nul­li­fy all En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency reg­u­la­tions in the state, ar­guing that the 10th Amend­ment pre­cludes any fed­er­al reg­u­la­tions over the en­vir­on­ment.

Ari­zona con­ser­vat­ives have already cri­ti­cized EPA’s up­com­ing pro­pos­al to lim­it car­bon emis­sions in power plants, call­ing it part of Pres­id­ent Obama’s “War on Coal.” The state has also clashed with the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment in court over its im­mig­ra­tion law and the Vot­ing Rights Act. And Re­pub­lic­an state Sen. Judy Burges, the lead spon­sor of this new EPA bill, has pushed oth­er state-sov­er­eignty le­gis­la­tion, in­clud­ing a bill that would ban cit­ies in Ari­zona from en­act­ing sus­tain­ab­il­ity pro­grams re­com­men­ded by the U.N.

Burges and sev­er­al co­spon­sors of the bill did not re­spond to re­quests for com­ment.

The law­makers join a long list of con­ser­vat­ives na­tion­wide who have cited the 10th Amend­ment when fight­ing fed­er­al agen­cies.

The amend­ment, which grants state gov­ern­ments all powers not ex­pressly giv­en to the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment, has fre­quently been cham­pioned by con­ser­vat­ives on is­sues in­clud­ing health care re­form and gun con­trol. The move­ment has even been col­lect­ively re­ferred to as the “Ten­ther Move­ment.”

At the World Eco­nom­ic For­um on Jan. 23, Texas Gov. Rick Perry spoke in fa­vor of states form­ing policies on same-sex mar­riage, marijuana leg­al­iz­a­tion, and abor­tion, cit­ing the 10th Amend­ment, ac­cord­ing to U.S. News and World Re­port. And in 2013, Sen. Ro­ger Wick­er, R-Miss., in­tro­duced a bill re­quir­ing fed­er­al agen­cies to prove that a rule does not con­flict with the 10th Amend­ment if a state of­fi­cial chal­lenges the rule.

But the prob­lem with Ari­zona’s 10th Amend­ment ar­gu­ment — and those in oth­er states — is that the amend­ment has been largely mean­ing­less for dec­ades. Al­though it gives states any powers not giv­en to the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment, two sec­tions of the Con­sti­tu­tion give the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment nearly any power it wants. The in­ter­state com­merce clause gives the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment the right to reg­u­late com­merce, and the ne­ces­sary and prop­er clause gives it the power pass any laws ne­ces­sary to carry out its oth­er powers.

With those clauses of­ten lib­er­ally ap­plied, the Su­preme Court ruled in sev­er­al cases in the early to mid-20th cen­tury that the 10th Amend­ment was a prom­ise that the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment would re­spect the states, but that it had es­sen­tially no leg­al power.

In 1941, Chief Justice Har­lan Stone wrote that the amend­ment was all but point­less: “The amend­ment states but a tru­ism that all is re­tained which has not been sur­rendered.”

What We're Following See More »
STAKES ARE HIGH
Debate Could Sway One-Third of Voters
6 hours ago
THE LATEST

"A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that 34% of registered voters think the three presidential debates would be extremely or quite important in helping them decide whom to support for president. About 11% of voters are considered 'debate persuadables'—that is, they think the debates are important and are either third-party voters or only loosely committed to either major-party candidate."

Source:
YOU DON’T BRING ME FLOWERS ANYMORE
Gennifer Flowers May Not Appear After All
7 hours ago
THE LATEST

Will he or won't he? That's the question surrounding Donald Trump and his on-again, off-again threats to bring onetime Bill Clinton paramour Gennifer Flowers to the debate as his guest. An assistant to flowers initially said she'd be there, but Trump campaign chief Kellyanne Conway "said on ABC’s 'This Week' that the Trump campaign had not invited Flowers to the debate, but she didn’t rule out the possibility of Flowers being in the audience."

Source:
HAS BEEN OFF OF NEWSCASTS FOR A WEEK
For First Debate, Holt Called on NBC Experts for Prep
7 hours ago
THE DETAILS

NBC's Lester Holt hasn't hosted the "Nightly News" since Tuesday, as he's prepped for moderating the first presidential debate tonight—and the first of his career. He's called on a host of NBC talent to help him, namely NBC News and MSNBC chairman Andy Lack; NBC News president Deborah Turness; the news division's senior vice president of editorial, Janelle Rodriguez; "Nightly News" producer Sam Singal, "Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd, senior political editor Mark Murray and political editor Carrie Dann. But during the debate itself, the only person in Holt's earpiece will be longtime debate producer Marty Slutsky.

Source:
WHITE HOUSE PROMISES VETO
House Votes to Bar Cash Payments to Iran
7 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The House passed legislation late Thursday that would prohibit the federal government from making any cash payments to Iran, in protest of President Obama's recently discovered decision to pay Iran $1.7 billion in cash in January. And while the White House has said Obama would veto the bill, 16 Democrats joined with Republicans to pass the measure, 254-163."

Source:
NO SURPRISE
Trump Eschewing Briefing Materials in Debate Prep
7 hours ago
THE DETAILS

In contrast to Hillary Clinton's meticulous debate practice sessions, Donald Trump "is largely shun­ning tra­di­tion­al de­bate pre­par­a­tions, but has been watch­ing video of…Clin­ton’s best and worst de­bate mo­ments, look­ing for her vul­ner­ab­il­it­ies.” Trump “has paid only curs­ory at­ten­tion to brief­ing ma­ter­i­als. He has re­fused to use lecterns in mock de­bate ses­sions des­pite the ur­ging of his ad­visers. He prefers spit­balling ideas with his team rather than hon­ing them in­to crisp, two-minute an­swers.”

Source:
×