States invoke the Tenth Amendment to challenge federal directives
Utah, Texas claim Tenth Amendment to reject federal mandates
Governors and legislatures have invoked the Tenth Amendment to redraw the lines of state authority. Utah's S.B. 57, the Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act, was signed by Gov. Spencer Cox on January 31, 2024, and creates a legislative process to block state officials from assisting enforcement of federal directives the legislature deems unconstitutional. Texas S.B. 4, signed by Gov. Greg Abbott on December 18, 2023, criminalizes certain border crossings and authorizes state removal orders and state arrests; it immediately drew federal lawsuits and complex rulings in the federal courts in early 2024. The Tenth Amendment originally reserved unenumerated powers to the states and people, and Chief Justice John Marshall's opinion in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) and the Supreme Court's opinion in NFIB v. Sebelius (2012) shaped the modern balance between federal implied powers and state autonomy. That legal architecture has invited state attorneys general, private litigants and law firms to press federalism claims in ways that can produce patchwork rules over abortion, housing, policing and immigration while ordinary people face legal uncertainty.
Why this matters
When states pick and choose which federal mandates to enforce, families face uneven healthcare grids, migrants risk detention outside standard asylum processes, and clinics and courts become battlegrounds—leaving low-income and minority communities to shoulder legal uncertainty (aclutx.org). You can join or support state preemption lawsuits, back uniform-protection ballot initiatives, tap know-your-rights resources from the ACLU, and lobby your legislature to shore up state constitutions against overreach.
Core Facts
James Madison pressed for clear limits on federal power during ratification and sponsored the Tenth Amendment to reassure states about reserved rights.
The Supreme Court in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) endorsed broad federal powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause, shifting the balance away from a narrow reading of the Tenth Amendment.
Courts and Congress have at times centralized authority during Reconstruction and the New Deal, and federal preemption has shaped modern disputes over health, immigration and reproductive care.
The Supreme Court in NFIB v. Sebelius (2012) held that the Medicaid expansion was coercive under the Spending Clause but otherwise upheld large parts of the Affordable Care Act, leaving states with complex choices.
Utah passed S.B.57 (Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act) and Gov. Spencer J. Cox signed it on January 31, 2024. The law creates a legislative mechanism to bar state officials from enforcing federal directives until courts rule otherwise.
Texas passed S.B.4 and Gov. Greg Abbott signed it on December 18, 2023; the law's criminal and removal provisions prompted immediate federal lawsuits and piecemeal court proceedings in early 2024.
Key Actors
James Madison
Framer and chief architect of the Bill of Rights
Drafted proposals to limit federal power during the 1789 ratification debates and championed protections later bundled as the Tenth Amendment
John Marshall
Chief Justice of the United States
Authored McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), a decision that upheld implied federal powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause
John G. Roberts Jr.
Chief Justice of the United States
Wrote the controlling opinion in NFIB v. Sebelius (2012), which addressed Medicaid expansion and limits on Spending Clause coercion
Samuel A. Alito Jr.
Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
Authored Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022), a decision that returned abortion regulation to the states and altered federalism stakes
Spencer Cox
Governor of Utah
Signed the Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act (S.B.57) on January 31, 2024, creating a legislative path to block state enforcement of some federal directives
Greg Abbott
Governor of Texas
Signed Texas S.B.4 on December 18, 2023, a law expanding state criminal and removal authority at the border; the law immediately faced federal legal challenges
Ken Paxton
Attorney General of Texas
Filed multiple suits asserting state authority against federal immigration and administrative actions during the 2020s
Jonathan F. Mitchell
Former state solicitor general and conservative legal strategist
Drafted and promoted model state sovereignty laws and litigated aggressive state-centered resistance theories
Paul D. Clement
Appellate litigator and former U.S. Solicitor General
Argued high-stakes federalism cases for states and businesses in the 2000s and 2010s, shaping modern litigation strategies
Actionable Insights
Study Supreme Court tests and doctrines that limit state resistance
Learn the specific legal tests courts apply to preemption, commandeering and Spending Clause coercion
Follow litigation centers and constitutional law experts
Track current federalism cases and scholarly analysis to see how state sovereignty statutes fare in court
Prepare know-your-rights plans for public interactions
Memorize key phrases and document steps before protests or enforcement encounters to protect civil rights
Use official complaint processes when your federal rights are violated
File the proper forms and meet deadlines to document violations with federal agencies and civil rights offices
Test Your Knowledge
Ready to put your civic knowledge to the test? Take a quiz on this topic to see how well you understand the key concepts.
Start Quiz20 questions available