Who’s Left Standing for State Sovereignty?:
Private Party Standing to Raise Tenth Amendment Claims
By: Katherine Connolly
The most critical topic raised in Who’s Left Standing for State Sovereignty?: Private Party Standing to Raise Tenth Amendment Claims by Katherine Connolly is the Supreme Court and State courts oscillating view of the Tenth Amendment, the contradictory views between circuit court of appeals on the Amendment, and an analysis of private party Tenth Amendment standing. “In the decades since its adoption, American courts have vigorously debated the substantive meaning of this Amendment.” (Connolly 1540) Many of the circuit court of appeals have had a difficult time coming to an agreement on the underlying meaning of the Amendment. “Six circuit courts of appeals now hold the increasingly popular majority position that only states and not private parties may enforce the Tenth Amendment. Two circuit courts of appeals hold the once-majority position that private party standing to assert claims under the Tenth Amendment is permissible.” (Connolly 1541) The article was taken from the Boston College Law Review. Katherine Connolly, the author of the note, has her opinions on the topic of the Tenth Amendment and knows the history of it because she is a third year student at Boston College Law School and the senior editor of the Law Review. Section 2:
The author did not make any vague, ambiguous or unsupported statements in the note. Connolly supported all of her facts with evidence and laws. In the introduction she laid out exactly what was going to be discussed in the three parts of the article so that there would be no confusion and then went on to thoroughly explain each part with support from other journals she found. Each state has the ability to interpret the Tenth Amendment and private party standing the way they want. “Relying on the third-party standing bar, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has ruled that the Tenth Amendment protects states’ rights alone.” (Connolly 1560) In each part of the note Connolly listed each of the circuit court of appeals interpretation of the Tenth Amendment and their reasoning for why, which was based off of different cases that have occurred in the past. “The Eleventh Circuit has since reiterated that a Tenth Amendment claim in and of itself does not raise a problem of a generalized grievance because a party bringing a Tenth Amendment claim has standing so long as the party can identify a concrete, personalized injury resulting from the alleged constitutional violation.” (Connolly 1558) There were many opposing views from different circuit courts listed in the article; “In recent years, two other U.S. courts of appeals joined the Tenth Circuit in ruling that private party Tenth Amendment standing violates the third-party standing bar because the Tenth Amendment does not grant rights to private parties.” (Connolly 1561) When Connolly explained the different circuit court of appeals and their view on private party Tenth Amendment standing she backed it up with evidence from certain past cases like United States v. Bond and Tennessee Electric Power Co. v. Tennessee Valley Authority.
Every aspect of the note Who’s Left Standing for State Sovereignty?: Private Party Standing to Raise Tenth Amendment Claims by Connolly is supported with empirical data. “The Gregory opinion was bolstered the following year in 1992 when the Court decided New York v. United States and declared the Tenth Amendment to forbid the federal government from “commandeering” state legislatures.” (Connolly 1546) She explains the history and different views and interpretation of the Tenth Amendment by supporting it with evidence from former cases, laws and what each circuit court of appeals has stated their view on the subject as evidence. “In the 1975 case of Warth v. Seldin, the Court articulated the third-party standing bar when it expressed that, regardless...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document