South Dakota v. Dole: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=U.S. Supreme Court |citation=483 U.S. 203 (1987) |date=1987 |subject=Constitutional Law |appealed_from= |case_treatment=No |overturned= |partially_...") |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|date=1987 | |date=1987 | ||
|subject=Constitutional Law | |subject=Constitutional Law | ||
|facts=Congress decided to withhold federal funds from states where they allowed people less than 21 to consume alcohol. | |facts=Congress decided to withhold federal funds from states where they allowed people less than 21 to consume alcohol. | ||
|issues=Whether Congress can place conditions on monies to be received by states when the issue is a state issue. | |issues=Whether Congress can place conditions on monies to be received by states when the issue is a state issue. | ||
|arguments= | |arguments=Congress can't impose a national drinking age of 21. | ||
|holding= | |holding=Congress hasn't violated the spending provision of the "[[Constitution_of_the_United_States#Taxing_and_Spending_Clause|tax and power clause]]". | ||
| | |||
|rule=If Congress desires to condition the States’ receipt of federal funds, it must do so unambiguously enabling the states to exercise their choice knowingly, cognizant of their participation. | |rule=If Congress desires to condition the States’ receipt of federal funds, it must do so unambiguously enabling the states to exercise their choice knowingly, cognizant of their participation. | ||
They may be illegitimate if they are unrelated to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs. | They may be illegitimate if they are unrelated to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:44, July 14, 2023
| South Dakota v. Dole | |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
|---|---|
| Citation | 483 U.S. 203 (1987) |
| Date decided | 1987 |
Facts
Congress decided to withhold federal funds from states where they allowed people less than 21 to consume alcohol.
Issues
Whether Congress can place conditions on monies to be received by states when the issue is a state issue.
Arguments
Congress can't impose a national drinking age of 21.
Holding
Congress hasn't violated the spending provision of the "tax and power clause".
Rule
If Congress desires to condition the States’ receipt of federal funds, it must do so unambiguously enabling the states to exercise their choice knowingly, cognizant of their participation.
They may be illegitimate if they are unrelated to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs.
