Context_1 : The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2) establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the supreme law of the land. It provides that state courts are bound by the supreme law; in case of conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be applied. Even state constitutions are subordinate to federal law. In essence, it is a conflict-of-laws rule specifying that certain national acts take priority over any state acts that conflict with national law. In this respect, the Supremacy Clause follows the lead of Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation, which provided that "Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress Assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them." A constitutional provision announcing the supremacy of federal law, the Supremacy Clause assumes the underlying priority of federal authority, at least when that authority is expressed in the Constitution itself. No matter what the federal government or the states might wish to do, they have to stay within the boundaries of the Constitution. This makes the Supremacy Clause the cornerstone of the whole American political structure. Context_2 : The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) – formerly known as the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) – is a program administered by the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides matching funds to states for health insurance to families with children. The program was designed to cover uninsured children in families with incomes that are modest but too high to qualify for Medicaid. Context_3 : The Title X Family Planning Program, officially known as Public Law 91-572 or “Population Research and Voluntary Family Planning Programs”, was enacted under President Richard Nixon in 1970 as part of the Public Health Service Act. Title X is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services. Title X is legally designed to prioritize the needs of low-income families or uninsured people (including those who are not eligible for Medicaid) who might not otherwise have access to these health care services. These services are provided to low-income and uninsured individuals at reduced or no cost. Its overall purpose is to promote positive birth outcomes and healthy families by allowing individuals to decide the number and spacing of their children. The other health services provided in Title X-funded clinics are integral in achieving this objective. Context_4 : The Rotenberg Law (Russian: Закон Ротенберга ) - the draft of Federal law of Russian Federation #607554-6 On amendments to the Federal law "On compensation for violation of the right to trial within a reasonable time or the right to execution of a judicial act within a reasonable time" (clarification of certain provisions of the Federal law in regard to obtaining compensation for the violation of the right to execution of a judicial act within a reasonable time). The law is informally named after a Russian businessman Arkady Rotenberg, after Italy has frozen nearly $40 million in assets held Context_5 : A three-part referendum was held in Switzerland on 4 October 1896. Voters were asked whether they approved of a federal law on guarantees in the cattle trade, a federal law on the accounting system for the railways and a federal law on the disciplinary penal code for the federal army. Whilst the law on the railways was approved, the other two were rejected by voters. Context_6 : The Building Strong Families Program (BSF) is part of the Healthy Marriage Initiative funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, "to learn whether well-designed interventions can help couples fulfill their aspirations for a healthy relationship, marriage, and a strong family." Context_7 : The Canadian Bill of Rights (French: "Déclaration canadienne des droits" ) is a federal statute and bill of rights enacted by Parliament of Canada on August 10, 1960. It provides Canadians with certain quasi-constitutional rights at Canadian federal law in relation to other federal statutes. It was the earliest expression of human rights law at the federal level in Canada, though an Implied Bill of Rights had already been recognized in the Canadian Common Law. The Canadian Bill of Rights remains in effect, but its widely acknowledged ineffectiveness arises in large part to its character as a federal statute only—although as to Canadian federal law, the Bill of Rights has subsequently acquired through judicial interpretation a quasi-constitutional status through the paramountcy doctrine. These legal and constitutional limitations were a significant reason that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was established as an unambiguously-constitutional-level Bill of Rights for all Canadians, governing the application of both federal and provincial law in Canada, with the patriation of the Constitution of Canada in 1982. Since patriation, its usefulness at federal law in Canada is mostly limited to issues pertaining to the enjoyment of property, as set forth in its section 1(a)—a slightly-broader "life, liberty, and security of the person" right than is recognized in Section Seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Context_8 : Fourteen referendums were held in Switzerland in 1978. The first four were held on 26 February on a popular initiative "for more co-decisions of the Federal Assembly and the People on national road making" (rejected), an amendment to the federal law on aged and bereaved insurance (approved), a popular initiative to lower the retirement age (rejected) and amending the article on the economic cycle in the Swiss Federal Constitution (approved). The next five referendums were held on 28 May on a law on time (rejected), an amendment to the tariff law (approved), a new federal law banning abortion (rejected), a federal law on promoting research and universities (rejected) and a popular initiative "for 12 Sundays a year free from motor vehicles" (rejected). Context_9 : The California Healthy Families Program (HFP) is the California implementation of the federal Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that provides low cost insurance offering health, dental, and vision coverage to children who do not have insurance today and do not qualify for no-cost Medi-Cal. Context_10 : Pennsylvania v. Nelson, 350 U.S. 497 (1956) , was a United States Supreme Court case that established a precedent for the preemption of United States Federal law over State laws. The case was argued November 15–16, 1955 and the decision was handed down April 2, 1956. The State of Pennsylvania tried to convict a man of sedition under a state law, but a Federal law existed on the same subject. The Court ruled that the Federal law, the Smith Act, overruled the state law, the Pennsylvania Sedition Act, even though the state law was created before the federal law. Nelson, who was convicted under the state law, was therefore mistried. fact_1 : The California Healthy Families Program (HFP) is the California implementation of the federal Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) that provides low cost insurance offering health, dental, and vision coverage to children who do not have insurance today and do not qualify for no-cost Medi-Cal. fact_2 : The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) – formerly known as the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) – is a program administered by the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides matching funds to states for health insurance to families with children. Question: Who administers the federal law that the California Healthy Families Program implements?
Output: the United States Department of Health and Human Services