Answer:
Explanation: The recent Supreme Court decisions provides hope to those championing state sovereignty.
In National Federation of Independent Business (N.F.I.B.) v. Sebelius, a majority of the court determined that the individual mandate under the health care act exceeded Congress’s commerce clause power.
In Shelby County v. Holder, the court held that Congress unconstitutionally infringed on state sovereignty by using an outdated formula under the Voting Rights Act to decide which states had to get federal approval before changing their voting laws.
In United States v. Windsor, the court emphasized that the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional in part because the regulation of domestic relations has always been left to the exclusive province of the states.
The Supreme Court has been the last arbiter of the balance between state and federal power, and that balance is dictated by the narrowest of margins. Consequently, federal politics, including the next Supreme Court appointment, may determine the scope of state sovereignty for years to come.
