Editorial: Oklahoma law suggests dangerous rejection of federal authority
February 8, 2012
For years, Oklahoma was the state where the wind came sweeping down the plain, where the wavin’ wheat sure could smell sweet and where the wind came right behind the rain. Now it is a debate that comes sweeping in, states’ “rights” that smell sweet and absolute sovereignty — seemingly ignoring the United States — that follows a rainstorm.
Students may be unaware of Oklahoma Sen. Ralph Shortey’s proposed amendment to his state’s constitution. The proposed amendment would effectively deny that the Supreme Court has the power to review Oklahoma’s laws. To students in Iowa, the amendment may seem distant and removed, but if passed, its influence on our country would be crippling.
The cohesion of the United States depends on state and national governments sharing and often dividing power. In some areas, such as police powers, the states are the sole inheritor of power. However, other areas such as interstate trade and judicial review are critical powers the federal government needs.
In areas of federal authority, it is important for states to capitulate. If one state exempts itself from review by the union, it is privileging itself beyond the other states. In issues that affect the other members of the federal union, a moderator is needed who can mitigate grievances.
Oklahoma is questioning the federal powers granted by the Constitution. The United States depends on the ability to levy necessary taxes, declare war, negotiate foreign trade, regulate interstate trade and coin money between the states equally. Oklahoma and other states may not appreciate the ruling at times, but the federal government must have authority over the states in the powers granted to it by the Constitution.
The issue was originally settled when the Supreme Court was granted the power of judicial review over the laws of the states in 1803 with Marbury v. Madison. However, even before Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court issued the highest laws of the land, reversible only by a constitutional amendment. It has always had the power to review state law in order to maintain the cohesion of the country.
The Constitution grants “the judicial power of the United States … in one Supreme Court.” This is important to ensure legal equality between the states. Within the union, no state has the right to disregard its commitments to the remaining states and the union as a whole.
Distant issues such as Oklahoma’s proposed amendment could have considerable consequences for ISU students. If Oklahoma is successful, it could endanger the federally guaranteed rights of citizens and result in the drastic weakening of the federal union.