Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.

My Opinion: This is a very important Amendment that is constantly over looked or over shadowed by bigger and better things. People don't realize that without little amendments like this we would not have rights of rules for marriages, divorces, driving licenses, voting, state taxes, job and school requirements, rules for police and fire departments, and many more.

20 + States Declaring Sovereignty Under the Tenth Amendment



My Opinion: I think that this video hits on some really good points that most people do not think about. The Federal government is all for all these new programs and implementing them in all the states. But what happens if this state cannot support them financially. States can not just print their own money, but it seems like the Government suspects them to. Then the citizens get all upset because they once had this program that was great then it might be taken away from them. I do think that the Tenth Amendment needs to be amplified and put to use to stop this from happening.

Child Support Recovery Act violates Tenth Amendment

A U.S. district court held that the Child Support Recovery Act (CSRA), 18 U.S.C. 228, violates the Tenth Amendment. That statute imposes criminal liability on parents who willfully fail to make support payments for their children living in another state.

Here, King, a Texas resident, was indicted under the CSRA for failing to make support payments for his child, who resided in New York. King moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the CSRA violates the Tenth Amendment because it exceeds Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce.

Granting the motion to dismiss, the court noted that the Second Circuit rejected a Tenth Amendment challenge to the CSRA in United States ro. Sage, 92 F.3d 101 (2d Cir. 1996). In that case, the court employed the approach adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), which articulated three categories of activity subject to regulation by Congress under the Commerce Clause: (1) the use of the channels of commerce; (2) instrumentalities of, or persons or things in, interstate commerce; and (3) activities having a substantial relation to interstate commerce.

In Sage, the Second Circuit held that Congress may regulate the obstruction of interstate commerce under its power to regulate things in interstate commerce. That court determined that a failure to make a support payment for a child residing in another state is a failure to comply with an obligation to make payments in interstate commerce. Therefore, the court reasoned, under Sage, the failure to make child support payments obstructs interstate commerce, and is thus subject to regulation under the Commerce Clause.

However, the court emphasized, after Sage the U.S. Supreme Court decided United States ro. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598,43 ATIA L. Rep. 242 (Aug. 2000). There, the Court struck down the civil remedy provisions of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and clarified the standards for regulating the obstruction of interstate commerce. In Morrison, the Court found that VAWA's civil remedies for victims of gender-motivated violence could not be justified based on congressional findings that gender-motivated violence (1) deters victims from engaging in interstate commerce, (2) increases medical and other costs, and (3) decreases the supply of and demand for interstate products. Even though these effects of gender-motivated violence relate to the obstruction of interstate commerce, the Court held Congress may regulate conduct that obstructs interstate commerce through the Commerce Clause only where that conduct has a substantial effect on such commerce.

My Opinion: Me being a child of divorced parents, this article kind of hit close to home. I know parents all over the country have problems obtaining child support and to throw in that the other parent cannot live in another state makes things even more difficult. In some cases this amendment is appropriate but in some it is not.