MBE Rules · Constitutional Law
Anti-commandeering doctrine
NY v. US / Printz
The rule
Congress may not compel states or state officials to enact or enforce federal regulatory programs. Conditioning federal funds is permissible (Dole); commandeering legislatures (NY v. US) or executive officials (Printz) is not.
In plain English
The federal government can't force states to make or carry out federal laws, but it can offer money to encourage them to do so.
Worked example
Congress passes a law requiring states to enforce a federal gun control measure. A state refuses, and the law is struck down because it forces state officials to act, violating the anti-commandeering rule.
Memory hook
Commandeering: Congress can't coerce! States can't be forced to enforce federal rules. Fund conditioning? Yes. Forced action? No.
The trap
Students think: Congress can direct states if it's for a federal purpose. Wrong, because commandeering violates state sovereignty. The actual test is whether states are compelled to enforce or enact federal programs.
How examiners test it
The MBE loves: Congress passes a law requiring states to enforce a federal regulation. Trap: students assume federal purpose allows it. Key: if states are forced to act, it's unconstitutional commandeering.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.