Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ol Janx Spirit

(792 posts)
10. They do not opt out of federal laws, they just can't be compelled to enforce federal laws for the federal government.
Wed Jan 28, 2026, 01:52 PM
Wednesday

This principle of “anti-commandeering” dates back to the 1842 Supreme Court decision Prigg v. Pennsylvania, in which the justices ruled that local and state law enforcement agencies could not be compelled to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act.

In short: the state is tasked with enforcing state laws; the federal government is tasked with enforcing federal laws. States cannot formally nullify federal law, nor can they block federal agents from operating within their borders--but they cannot be forced by the federal government to enforce federal laws.

Of course, due to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, federal laws and treaties made under the authority of the United States constitute the "supreme Law of the Land", and thus take priority over any conflicting state laws.

Recommendations

4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In Printz v. United State...»Reply #10