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 ...view middle of the document...
“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 of sufficient injury, plaintiffs may only bring claims when asserting their own legal rights.” (Connolly 1550)
There was just one question I still had at the end of the article; why were the circuit courts of appeal basing their view on the Tenth Amendment private party standing on the past case Tennessee Electric Power Co. v. Tennessee Valley Authority and not any other past case when TVA was not intended to be a binding precedent? “Thus, if TVA were intended to be authoritative it would not only have established binding precedent on a complex question of constitutional law and judicial review, but also would have directly overturned recent Court practice to the contrary.” (Connolly 1570) Many Circuit courts base their decisions off of this case because they think it is a binding precedent. “Not one has made an independent argument apart from any...