Wake Forest University political scientist John Dinan is no fan of either secession or state nullification of federal laws. But Dinan sees at least three legitimate means state governments can use to push for the federal government to repeal or relax its directives.
One is for states to choose not to participate in a federal program if a choice is offered — even if that means paying the penalty of forfeiting federal funds. A second option is to decriminalize activity at the state level, even if that same activity carries federal penalties under federal law. (Consider state laws to remove criminal penalties for medical marijuana use.) A third option is to approve a state law that conflicts with the federal law in cases involving no clear U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The object with this option is not to flout the federal law, but instead to set up an opportunity for federal courts to settle the issue of the federal law’s constitutionality.
In the video clip below, Dinan spells out the possible benefits of the third approach.
2:55 p.m. update: Click play below to watch the full 1:00:06 event.
You’ll find other John Locke Foundation video presentations here.
5 p.m. update: The second paragraph has been edited to clarify Dinan’s remarks.
