Source: https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=1138388
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 06:27:18+00:00

Document:
6 be found among the constitutional powers conferred by the people. This points to the desirability of considering the na- ture of these powers as a background for and as related to our survey of legislation. To this end, we shall preliminarily note generally the character of federal powers, and then more specif- ically discuss certain enumerated powers respecting commerce, property, war, treaties, and general welfare. Thereafter, we shall refer to the doctrine of equitable apportionment as de- veloped by the Supreme Court in deciding water controversies between states. And finally, we shall consider certain inter- state compacts, the validity of which depends upon conform- ance with express constitutional requirements. Generally It has long been established that the Government of the United States is paramount in its sphere of delegated authority. As the Supreme Court said in 1819:6 If any one proposition could command the universal assent of mankind, we might expect it would be this- that the government of the Union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action. That statement in M'Culloch v. Maryland is accompanied by others making it clear that this supremacy is such as "to re- move all obstacles to its action within its own sphere, and so to modify every power vested in subordinate governments, as to 8 4 Wheat, at 405. Since Congress may validly authorize federal construc- tion, or license nonfederal construction, of projects in waters under its jurisdiction, no interference with the sovereignty of the state results when it does so. United States v. Appalachian Electric Power Co., 311 U. S. 377, 427-428 (1940), reh. den., 312 U. S. 712 (1941) ; Oklahoma V. Atkinson, 313 U. S. 508, 534-535 (1941). Any state rights under a judicial apportionment among states of unappropriated waters in an interstate navigable stream are subordinate to and dependent upon the superior federal right of control for navigation improvement. Arizona v. California, 298 U. S. 558, 571 (1936). "Whenever the constitutional powers of the federal government and those of the state come into conflict, the latter must yield." Florida v. Mellon, 273 U. S. 12, 17 (1927). See also First Iowa Hydro-Electrio Cooperative v. Federal Power Commission, 328 U. S. 152,181 (1946).

References: v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.