CHAPTER XLV
CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS OF STATE GOVERNMENT [Footnote: For a fuller discussion of the constitutional basis of state government, see Chapter XXII of Beard's American Government and Politics. ]
573. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON STATE GOVERNMENTS.—Under the Articles of Confederation the states exercised practically sovereign powers; in the interests of a strong National government the Constitution adopted in 1789 distinctly limited the scope of state government. The Federal Constitution transferred many important powers from the states to the Federal government, and imposed certain specific limitations upon state governments. The more important of these limitations are as follows:
No state may, without the consent of Congress, lay or collect imposts and duties upon exports and imports. The single exception to this constitutional prohibition is that a state may lay such imports or duties as are absolutely necessary for executing its inspection laws. No state may lay a tonnage duty without the consent of Congress.
No state may levy a tax on the property, lawful agencies, or instrumentalities of the Federal government. This is not a constitutional limitation, but was deduced by Chief Justice Marshall from the nature of the Federal system. In recent years, however, this doctrine has been modified to mean that no state may tax a federal instrumentality if such a tax would impair its efficiency in performing the function which it was designed to serve.
States may legislate concerning local commercial matters, but no state may interfere with interstate commerce. No state may pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts. The states have practically no control over the monetary system. They may not coin money, emit bills of credit, or make anything but gold and silver coin legal tender. States may charter and regulate state banks, however, and may also authorize a state bank to issue notes for circulation.
No state may make or enforce any law which abridges the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. No state shall pass any bill of attainder, by which is meant a legislative act which inflicts punishment upon some person without ordinary judicial trial. Nor may any state pass an ex post facto law, that is to say, a law which imposes punishment for an act which was not legally punishable at the time when it was committed. Lastly, no state may deprive any citizen of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.
574. POWERS OF STATE GOVERNMENTS.—Federal law is the highest law of the land, and no state constitution, state statute, or local law or ordinance, may contravene it. But beyond this restriction, the authority of the state is supreme. Just as state government must defer to Federal authority, so local government is subservient to state authority. Just as the Federal Supreme Court may declare unconstitutional any executive or legislative act, either of the National, state, or local authorities, so the Supreme Court of any state may declare null and void the acts of state or local authorities which conflict with its constitution. Though they are limited by the Federal Constitution in matters which are preeminently national, the states reserve to themselves a vast body of authority. Almost all of the ordinary activities of life are controlled by state or local governments, rather than by the Federal government.
575. CLASSIFICATION OF STATE CONSTITUTIONS: ACCORDING TO AGE.—Each of the forty-eight states in the Union has a written constitution. To bring out the fundamental similarities and differences among the various state constitutions, these documents may be classified in two ways, first as to age, and second, in the light of democratic development.
If state constitutions are classified on the basis of age, it will be noted that the constitutions of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and other New England states show signs of having been strongly influenced by colonial precedents. Next come constitutions which in form and general content stand midway between the earlier New England constitutions and those of more recent years. The constitutions of New York (1894), Pennsylvania (1873), Indiana (1851), Wisconsin (1848), Kentucky (1891), Minnesota (1857), and Iowa (1857), are examples. Next come those constitutions of the southern states which have been revised within the last quarter of a century. Finally, we may note that California, Oregon, Oklahoma and a few other western states have recently drafted new constitutions in which there has been a more or less radical departure from the precedents set in the older commonwealths.