This Commentary argues that the Court decided New York v. United States incorrectly. The Court failed to take into account both the highly pragmatic nature of federal-state questions and the extent to which state interests are represented in the national political process. The Court, instead, should have followed the author's "Federalism Proposal" whereby all issues of federalism arising under the Tenth Amendment are deemed non-justiciable and are left to the political branches for resolution. This Commentary illustrates the shortcomings of the New York approach in the context of national health care regulation.
Jesse H. Choper,
Federalism and Judicial Review: An Update,
21 Hastings Const. L.Q. 577
Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol21/iss3/3