Document: 527 U.S. 666119 S.Ct. 2291144 L.Ed.2d 605 131 F.3d 353, affirmed. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 98 149 COLLEGE SAVINGS BANK, PETITIONERv.FLORIDA PREPAID POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION EXPENSE BOARD et al. ON WRIT CERTIORARI TO APPEALS FOR THIRD CIRCUIT [June 23, 1999] Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The Trademark Remedy Clarification Act (TRCA), 106 Stat. 3567, subjects States to suits brought under §43(a) 1946 (Lanham Act) for false and misleading advertising, 60 441, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). question presented in this case is whether that provision effective permit suit against a State its alleged misrepresentation own product either because TRCA effects constitutionally permissible abrogation state sovereign immunity, or operates as an invitation waiver such immunity which automatically accepted by State's engaging activities regulated Lanham Act. 2 * In Chisholm v. Georgia, Dall. 419 (1793), we asserted jurisdiction over action assumpsit South Carolina citizen Georgia. so doing, reasoned Georgia's was qualified general jurisdictional provisions Article III, and, most specifically, extending federal judicial power controversies "between Citizens another State." Const., Art. §2, cl. 1. "shock surprise" created decision, Principality Monaco Mississippi, 292 313, 325 (1934), prompted immediate adoption Eleventh Amendment, provides: 3 "The Judicial United shall not be construed extend any law equity, commenced prosecuted one State, Subjects Foreign 4 Though precise terms bar only citizens foreign state, have long recognized Amendment accomplished much more: It repudiated central premise heads III superseded possessed before entering Union. This has been our understanding since landmark Hans Louisiana, 134 (1890). See also Ex parte New York, 256 490, 497 498 (1921); Monaco, supra at 320 328, Pennhurst School Hospital Halderman, 465 89, 97 (1984); Seminole Tribe Fla. Florida, 517 44, 54, 66 68 (1996). 5 While from absolute, two circumstances individual may sue State. First, Congress authorize exercise enforce Fourteenth enacted after specifically designed alter federal-state balance. Fitzpatrick Bitzer, 427 445 (1976). Second, waive consenting suit. Clark Barnard, 108 436, 447 448 (1883). turns on these present. II 6 Section 43(a) Act, 1125(a), 1946, private right "[a]ny person" who uses descriptions makes representations commerce. amends defining "any include instrumentality employee acting his her official capacity." §3(c), 3568. further provide entities "shall immune, eleventh amendment Constitution other doctrine Federal court person, including governmental nongovernmental entity violation Act," remedies available "to same extent are . against" nonstate entity. §3(b) (codified 1122). 7 Petitioner College Savings Bank Jersey chartered bank located Princeton, Jersey. Since 1987, it marketed sold CollegeSure certificates deposit finance costs college education. holds patent upon methodology administering certificates. Respondent Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board (Florida Prepaid) arm Florida. 1988, administered tuition prepayment program individuals with sufficient funds cover future expenses. infringement District Court That subject today's decision Ed. Bd. Bank, ante, p. ___. addition, court, filed instant alleging violated making misstatements about savings plans brochures annual reports. 8 moved dismiss ground barred immunity. argued had abrogated pursuant Congress's powers I decisions Tribe, supra, Fitzpatrick, can abrogate when legislates Amendment. intervened defend constitutionality TRCA. Both that, constructive articulated Parden Terminal R. Co. Ala. Docks Dept., 377 184 (1964), waived interstate marketing administration made clear activity would purported Prepaid's effective, merely but Due Process Clause rejected both arguments granted motion dismiss. 948 F. Supp. 400 (N. J. 1996). Appeals 353 (CA3 1997). We certiorari. 525 ___ (1999). 9 turn first contention Florida's validly abrogated. Our three Terms ago held regulate Commerce" conferred gives no authority As present case, petitioner relies §5 (1976), reaffirmed see U.S., 72 73, could used purpose. 10 provides "deprive person property without due process law." "[t]he enforce, appropriate legislation, article." City Boerne Flores, 521 507, ___, (1997), term "enforce" taken seriously object valid legislation must carefully delimited remediation prevention constitutional violations. claims respect remedy prevent deprivations species "property" rights: (1) free business competitor's advertising product, (2) more generalized secure one's interests. Neither qualifies protected Clause. 11 first: hallmark interest exclude others. "one essential sticks bundle rights commonly characterized property." Kaiser Aetna States, 444 164, 176 (1979). why all possess use public lands anyone hence sardonic maxim, explaining what economists call "tragedy commons,"1 res publica, nullius. well contain protect cognizable interests notably, dealing trademarks, owner he others using them. See, e.g., K mart Corp. Cartier, Inc., 485 176, 185 186 (1988) ("Trademark law, like contract confers rights, themselves exclusion. grants trademark rights"). Act's false-advertising provisions, however, bear relationship exclude; misrepresentations concerning products intruded exclusive dominion. 12 Unsurprisingly, points (or matter) recognizing freedom products. closest comes dicta International News Service Associated Press, 248 215, 236 (1918), where found equity unfair-competition claim rule concerns itself protection treats civil pecuniary nature right." But say "treats right" rights. fact, reads full passage statement saying just opposite, namely, will treat even though they properly such: 13 "In order sustain controversy, need affirm absolute news such. ; ac- 14 quire honest labor conduct lawful entitled guard already acquired furnishes basis ordinary unfair competition." Id., 237. note competition issue amounted nothing short theft proprietary information, something "exclude others" said exist. id., 233. 16 argues common-law tort "by definition" protects interests, Brief 15, thus context. Even logical matter, does follow, everything those A municipal ordinance prohibiting billboards residential areas homeowners, although erecting ordinarily deprive them property. To sweep within elusive violate frequent admonition "font Paul Davis, 424 693, 701 17 Petitioner's second assertion rests argument similar discussed, suffers flaw. businesses meaning Clause, passes prevents interference (which does). 19 20. assets (including good will) unquestionably property, taking "deprivation" sense doing business, profit asset, impinged competitors' advertising. 18 Finding there deprivation here, pursue follow-on otherwise require us resolve: prophylactic measure (viz., prohibition States' sovereign-immunity claims, Amendment) genuinely necessary next abrogated, voluntarily waived. IV "a personal privilege pleasure." 447. "is altogether voluntary part sovereignty." Beers Arkansas, 20 How. 527, 529 (1858). Accordingly, "test determining federal-court stringent one." Atascadero Scanlon, 473 234, 241 (1985). Generally, find if invokes jurisdiction, Gunter Atlantic Coast Line Co., 200 273, 284 (1906), else "clear declaration" intends submit Great Northern Life Ins. Read, 322 47, 54 (1944). 99 (1984) (State's consent "unequivocally expressed"). Thus, courts creation. Smith Reeves, 178 441 (1900). Nor stating intention "sue sued," Dept. Health Rehabilitative Servs. Nursing Home Assn., 450 147, 150 (1981) (per curiam), authorizing " 'in competent jurisdiction,' Kennecott Copper Tax Comm'n, 327 573, 577 579 (1946). may, absent contractual commitment contrary, conditions apply changes pending supra. There suggestion here respondent expressly consented being sued court. affirmatively invoked jurisdiction. Rather, maintain "impliedly" "constructively" They do (1964) elliptical stands nadir (and, immunity) jurisprudence. Parden, permitted employees railroad owned operated Alabama bring Employers' Liability (FELA) their employer. Despite absence statute referring authorized virtue subjecting "[e]very common carrier commerce between several States," 45 51 (1940 ed.). FELA disavowed waiver: 21 "By enacting [FELA] conditioned operate amenability provided Act; thereafter operating commerce, condition suit." 192. 22 four dissenting Justices refused infer "expressly declared" liability, went acknowledge concession strictly speaking, analysis effect did clarity. 198 (opinion White, J.). 23 Only nine years later, Employees Public Welfare Mo. Department Mo., 411 279 (1973), began retreat Parden. written dissenters solitary dissent Parden's author Missouri immune Fair Labor Standards health facilities. Although covered hospitals question, 29 203(d) (1964 ed.), coverage enforceable 285 286, think expressed clarity supersede individuals. "put side" involving "dramatic circumstances" rather isolated activity," 285, unlike applied broad class employees. distinguished "operated profit" "in area persons corporations normally ran enterprise." 284. Marshall, joined Stewart, further, concluding although, view, clearly courts, lacked so. 287, 289 290 concurring result). 24 year, observed (in dictum) "no place" jurisprudence, emphasized "find stated express language overwhelming implications text [will] leave room reasonable construction." Edelman Jordan, 415 651, 673 (1974) (internal quotation marks omitted). Several Welch Texas Highways Transp., 483 468 (1987), avoided addressing conditioning Commerce-Clause doubt discussion congressional intent negate longer law," overruled [it] inconsistent requirement unmistakably language," 478, n. 8.2 25 concede, surely must, intervening limited holding maintain, distinguishable, core principle remains law. Parden-style say, still possible following satisfied: unambiguously engages certain specified governed regulation. elect engage federally latter regard, goes, never deemed constructively cannot realistically choose abandon, operation police force; runs enterprise profit, field traditionally occupied corporations, sufficiently removed "core [state] functions," Reply 3, acts "market participant" cf. White Massachusetts Council Constr. Employers, 460 204, 206 208 (1983). On theory, nonessential selling for-profit educational investment vehicle put notice liability 26 constructive-waiver experiment ill conceived, merit attempting salvage remnant it. explain below detail, broke sharply prior cases, fundamentally incompatible later ones. statute, fact narrowed every subsequent consideration. short, anomaly jurisprudence indeed Today, drop shoe: Whatever remain overruled. 27 begin with, square cases requiring unequivocal. 47 whole point consents little reason assume actual based mere presence fundamental difference expressing unequivocally waives takes situation, certainty very far "altogether voluntary" Beers, How., 529.3 28 Indeed, waivers simply unheard context privileges. Edelman, "[c]onstructive associated surrender rights." 673. For example, imagine amended securities laws unmistakable committing fraud connection buying jury criminal prosecution fraud. Would "constructively waived" trial cases? After all, trading vital person's trade regarded choice. answer, course, no. classic description "intentional relinquishment abandonment known privilege." Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 464 (1938). "[C]ourts indulge presumption waiver" Kennedy ex rel. Bogash, 301 389, 393 (1937). Ohio Bell Telephone Util. Comm'n Ohio, 292, 307 (1937) (we "do presume acquiescence loss less than protected. Northern, 51; Pennhurst, 98. And obviously analogy established implied. King, 395 1, (1969) (describing "settled propositio[n]" "cannot implied should different Given how anomalous speak "constructive privilege, surprising cornerstone notion grounded. observation: 30 empowering necessarily surrendered portion sovereignty stand way imposition railroads regulatory power, follow application precluded immunity." 31 193 194, 11. recent repudiates proposition, formally overruling make explicit 32 Recognizing exact through also, practical circumvent antiabrogation Tribe. Forced sides coin side coin. "All creations attach recovery defendant's commission some act, possession status, conduct. prescriptions are, insofar prospective concerned, conditional, objects consciously hold status produces redescribed invitations 'waiver.' Pennsylvania Union Gas 491 43 (1989) (Scalia, J., dissenting). 451 452 (referring "abrogate" "necessary predicate" waiver). verbal distinction liable parties prepaid program, thing adding end "if chooses advertising." evidence name, consider revealing facts case: statutory relied demonstrate 33 grounded robust where, undertaken performed resembles behavior participants." Permitting exist course limit evil hard limitation support tradition than, limiting last Friday month. factors, bearing voluntariness waiver, principled enter into analysis. When Indian Gaming Regulatory failure negotiate gambling compact Indians, pause somehow involuntary. running tugboat towing service "fair rates" for-profit, resembled participants" held, 490 (1921), foreclosed admiralty York damages caused activity. involved Louisiana recover coupons bond issuance rendered participant financial markets. 34 dormant- inapposite. 204 (1983); Inc. Stake, 429 (1980); Hughes Alexandria Scrap Corp., 426 794 Those market, prefer goods services citizens, while market regulator. "state be, often burdened restrictions imposed participants," "[e]venhandedness suggests proprietors, similarly share existing freedoms constraints, inherent limits [dormant] Commerce Clause." 207 208, 3. exception judicially dormant-Commerce-Clause addressed prospect custom duties, exclusionary regulations, exercises (as opposed expenditure resources) favor Hughes, 808 entirely market. contrast, unconsenting directed exists "private" enterprise, par- ticipant." context, moreover, "[e]venhandness" expected: role sets apart employers defendants." Welch, 477. Cf. Atascadero, 246.4 35 contexts asserts Congress, powers, extract waivers" Petty Tennessee-Missouri Bridge 359 275 (1959), bistate (and assumed partook suability attached approval compact. Dakota Dole, 203 (1987) spending grant actions take, acceptance entails agreement 36 actions. These seem one. Under Compact I, §10, form obtaining Congress; granting gratuity. So obligation Spending disburse States; gifts. threatens refuses agree denial gift gratuity, sanction: exclusion Breyer's acknowledges intuitive two, disappears threatened withheld substantial enough. Post, 4-5. Perhaps so, why, funding, acknowledged "the inducement offered might coercive pass 'pressure compulsion.' 211, quoting Steward Machine 548, 590 event, guaranteed involved, coercion passed destroyed refusal V 37 principal thrust attack legitimacy itself. Breyer proclaim "not yet ready," post, (emphasis added), adhere still-warm precedent 110-year-old supports it.5 reiterates (but outline form, thankfully) now-fashionable revisionist accounts set forth opinions degree repetitive detail despoiled northern woods. Compare 9, 258 302 (Brennan, dissenting); 504 516 76 (Stevens, 100 (Souter, Alden Maine, recited sources soundly refuted, position marshaled conclusive, almost venerable, consigns debate Marbury Madison wrongly decided forums other-worldly ours. Gas, 34, 42 73; Alden, __. score, except minor observations peculiar case. 38 adopted decidedly perverse theory stare decisis. finding unconstrained venerable Hans, imbedded legal system century, see, 494 n.27; dissenting), time cling desperately severely undermined (Parden) 1960's. Surely approach decisis exactly backwards unless, wishes weapon guide, old do. stress observation resolution puzzling occasion criticize ungrounded text, lawsuit allow go forward having apparently (Florida) (College Jersey), Supp., 401 402 seems fall literal Amendment: ." Const. Amdt. added). 82 39 diffuse treatment federalism contained opinion: alarming learn many Members subscribe rejects details particular federalist doctrine" says "change reflect Nation's changing needs" puts "unchanging goal" worth mentioning liberty," believes directly achieved "promoting sharing among decision-making authority," demands finally come point) legislative flexibility" people's representatives Congress. 10. proposition liberty" authority" dropped lips Robespierre, Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, whose north star indeed, especially wielded people, dispersed countered. dispersal check "legislative deny utterly. (Justice close admitting example "federalism" constraint recognition invalidation things, given passion characterizes parts "dormant Clause," 11.) Legislative flexibility touchstone capacity combustion becomes acid test fire extinguisher. Congressional desirable, bounds Constitution. Beyond (the goes), menace. today sought discern are; denies permanent place. 40 Finally, comment comparison discredited substantive-due-process Lochner (1905). Lochner, novel legislature believed justified. alone were enough qualify mini-Lochner, list mini-Lochners endless. Most judgments invalidating fit description. always thought distinctive feature nicely captured Holmes's remark "Mr. Herbert Spencer's Social Statics," 75, impose economic philosophy aptly characterizes, opinion, dissent, enjoy normal protections step out proper sure Mr. Spencer shocked) "ordinary commercial ventures," 2. What ever happened flexibility"? 41 Concluding, foregoing reasons, neither Tradmark nor entertain judgment Third Circuit dismissing ordered. Notes 44 Hardin, Tragedy Commons, 162 Science 1243 (1968). response string criticizing narrowing up post-Parden "support[ed]" 4, least "carefully calling question," 6. His perception "support" 234 (1985), "suggest[ed] grant." 4. today, utterly rejecting elsewhere infra, 20, receipt analogous part, discuss above, quite impossible believe "questio[n] discards," 6: "We assume, deciding intimating view confined Amendment." 475. Calling flatly "question" "deciding," (lest "intimat[e] view" answer correct, handwriting wall inept cryptologist recognize spelling caption opinion. elsewhere, 17, logically practically overrule realizes enough, occupies half 13, supremely irrelevant matter us. 46 attempt cast characterization groundbreaking earlier allegedly worked major change. tenuous relation suspect dissent's soft-pedaled "roughly comparable" marks) "'waivers.'" California, 297 175 (1936), California Taylor, 553 (1957), substantive States. former concerned (a situation exist, Texas, 143 621 (1892)), Amendment" us," 568 16. Gardner Jersey, 329 565 (1947), bankruptcy trustee's objections unremarkable invoking courts. 8. sum, none laid foundation correct acknowledging "presented impression," 279, 299 (1973) non-commercial accord "modern trend," (citing Sovereign Immunities (FSIA), 1605(a)(2)), Stevens' 2: proposal ignores meant immutable resistant trends. combine literalistic interpretation affection FSIA, "commercial activities" disposition hardly "makes sense," (Breyer, 48 5. purports "accept Court's pre-Seminole decisions," 7, mean distorted prevailed briefly suggest announced fragile flower contrary reality conferral I. Moreover, combined, Contracts itself, greater, lesser, abrogative force (The interpose "purpor[t] pierce immunity," 8, 119 dissenting) allude refinement, difference. so-called rule" adumbrated until Employees, 285.) difficult reliance involves therefore explicitly Amendment), professed fidelity reflected (rather by) transcends narrow Or differently, "pre-Seminole decisions" pledges allegiance appear Stevens, 49 PETITIONER FLORIDA 50 52 dissenting. 53 assumptions correct. Accepting them, arguendo, reversed reasons joined. believe, how-ever, importance "states rights" merits additional comment. procedural posture requires "arm State" relate programs. Ante, validity assumption doubtful primarily present-day 18th century. Sovereigns then play kind marketplace today. treating enterprises sovereigns 1976.1 55 majority assumes petitioner's complaint serious amount relevant raised instrumentalities violation. my ample so.2 authorizes enact process. Unlike majority, am persuaded My conclusion premises rejects. 56 profit," ante asset appears company's balance sheet "good will" equivalent "activity." described §7 Sherman 210 §4 Clayton 731. deliberate destruction going 57 category depend strength category. Instead, depends violations occur. statutes, shoulder burden demonstrating command respect. done 58 Breyer, respectfully dissent. 59 1605(a)(2) (commercial immunity). definition activity": "either regular transaction act. character determined reference purpose." 1603(d). (1989), defense convinced correctly opinions. 61 62 63 64 whom Souter, Ginsburg join, 65 readily withdraw, previously contrary. (1964). abandon precedent. Thirty-five unanimously subscribed overrules. writing dissented issue, succinctly follows: 67 "[I]t transportation arising business. determine allowing regulable body legally resulting operations inimical purposes regulation option participation responsibility injury thereby." Douglas, Harlan, JJ.). seeking justify precedent, describes "anomaly" "broke cases," "fundamentally ones," "narrowed opinion." 12. things. 69 Far anomalous, finds ventures, outside "core" responsibilities, unlikely prove fulfillment basic obligation. decides exempt likely exemption, differently identically situated persons, threaten objectives aimed Compare, 1841(b) (1994 ed., III) (exempting companies regulations covering companies); 77c(a)(2) state-issued laws); C §652(5) "employer[s]" occupational safety laws), 106(a) (subjecting judgments); 1122(a) Act); 511(a) copyright infringement); 271(h) infringement). includes rules (expressly) related remedial exemption program. thereby avoids enforcement gap which, allied pressures competitive marketplace, place competitors significant disadvantage. 70 considerations Congress' entry proper" power) unusually strong, effectively 553, 566 (1957). At weak, supply firms supply, fairly demand special treatment, purse, easily Constitution's founders considerations, differing "abrogation" indicate sound, irrespective (1996), 71 break "sharply cases." cited "waivers" roughly comparable circumstances. rail, subjected power," 185, (different related) 568. had, venturing [federal] realm, 'assume[d] [waiver immunity] attached.' 196 (quoting Tennessee&nbhyph;Missouri 275, 281 282 (1959)). Earlier creditor's bankruptcy. 565, 573 574 (1947). Later suggesting grant, 247 conclusion. Where sharp break? question. "waiver" "express" "unequivocal." 13. referred show tries away "what waive" forgoing beneficence," [an] activity." 18. states explanation. 73 appeal intuition, easier voluntary, forgo "federal beneficence" refrain "otherwise compelling oppressive forbid perform lawful" act withhold "beneficence." intuition illustration; realistic examples sound money stake, harder, easier, refuse highway Commerce, Bureau Census, Aid Fiscal Year 1998, (Apr. 1999) (Federal Government $20 billion highways 1998). needed educate children competes company. $21 education seeks drawn gifts entitlements 74 wrong "narrowed" "subsequent opinion[s]," 12, decision. considered separate issues: Does immunity? How so? first; first. discussed not, "lift[ed]" could, ("Congress lift States" added)). Employees' enterprise," took clarity, power. (specifying "Congress act" required give advance consequence (loss immunity), noted, 296 (Marshall, 75 remaining mentions offer greater support. One said, 468, 475 (1987). Two Hospital, (Rehabilitation "falls short" indicating accepting 674 (same Security Act). specifying cannot, "abrogate unilaterally suit," 59, left open scope "unilaterally" criticism, standing "unremarkable, completely unrelated, 63. member questioned discards "merit it." because, sense. line dormant 429, 434 439 794, 804 810 1605(a)(2). followed modern trend, "spread rapidly Second World War," regarding Restatement (Third) Relations Law ch. 5, Introductory Note 391 (recognizing "immunity gave advantage enterprise"); Report Commission Work Thirty-Eighth Session, 11, ¶1, (United Nations Doc. A/41/498, Aug. 26, 1986) (when exercise" proceeding contract). widely nations play, holding, creates "anomaly." 77 resist strongly extension accept decisions, ready EEOC Wyoming, 226, 249 250 (1983) concurring). Stevens Souter detail. 78 surrounding debates Tribe's lacks (unlike diversity cases). 83, nn. 142 compare majority's argument, 22. 79 precedents important help majority. focus critically support, legislatively, 313 (1934); (1890); 419, (1793) (Iredell, (Souter ("Because purporting attained immunizing abrogation"). 80 (3) doctrine. new American Nation received doctrines selectively, some, abandoning others, frequently modifying light needs 130 lodestar, Dual Sovereignty (of Nation), demanded modification traditional single-sovereign doctrine, permitting abolish necessary. 81 (a) undercuts doctrine's "logical practical" justification, namely words Holmes), "there depends." Kawananakoa Polyblank, 205 349, (1907). violating "authority" assert (federal) true natural (b) Sovereignty, create bind (despite sovereignty) subsidiary sovereignty). 83 (c) means lesser lest (if remedies) ignore binds disabling National weakening creates. McCulloch Maryland, Wheat. 316, 407 408 (1819); Cohens Virginia, 264, 386 387 (1821). 84 (4) By interpreting rendering (sovereign ability (1905), social 90 ago. 85 elaborate last-mentioned point. similarity lies risk flexibility. Their create, decentralized remedies, intellectual computer-related materials, for, of, 21st century advanced economy. (illustrating harm work system). Similarly, inhibit creation innovative regimes, incentive-based systems, deliberately take account local differences assigning roles, responsibility, administrators, regime incorporate (e.g., water polluter) effectively. Yet, ironically, achieve federalism's objectives. 86 objective confused contours changed history. Thomas Jefferson's purchase reshaped great broad, literal, powers; Civil War ended "nullify" law; Deal, ultimate ratification, showed mutually exclusive; "civil clarified offers human liberty. each instance content specific change (territorial expansion, slavery, Depression, desegregation). 87 unchanging goal: Federalism helps liberty helping restraints distant government, promoting decisionmaking authority. B. Constant, Political Writings (B. Fontana transl. 1988) "Liberty Ancients Compared Moderns"). ancient world understood divide nation's creating government power; called "free" exercised divided. same, wrote divided authority, retained levels, foresaw, assumed, democratic levels facilitated closer citizen's home. 88 world, Modern technology large markets industry compete global place, pollution crosses borders, assure adequate discouraging "race bottom." Yet control Uniform about, chemical waste disposal, pesticides, food labeling, affect daily life locality. views localities relative wage environmental preferences underlie Local community despite forces matters control, community, increasingly interrelated complex world. 89 Courts sensitive interpret statutes draw lines local/national/international highly specific. allocate too broad. Legislatures, write embody Specific schemes, untouched, involve communities, funds, Depending encourage interaction working various government. problem flexible, context-specific constitutionalize ahistoric freezing limitations, tends beyond reach law). possibility ways. Young, 209 123 (1908), available, important. too, damages-collecting "enforcement" bureaucracy charged responsibilities hands ___; Printz 898, 977 (1997) perhaps able results decentralization) embodying funding programs rewriting apparent reason. 91 alternatives satisfactory. Unfortunately, formal strand skein anti-Republican Cicero elevate level akin James Madison. once played political independence joining center stage. Nevada Hall, 440 410, 418 court's concern. Federalist 81, 488 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961) (A. Hamilton). history need. modification, decentralize variety powers. diminishing somewhat satisfy liberty-protecting needs. sense, counterproductive. 92 know engaged alleges. dismissed threshhold. provide. reverse Appeals.

Category: 9