SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Constitutional Law Keyed to Varat
New York v. United States
Citation:
505 U.S. 144, 112 S.Ct. 2408, 120 L.Ed.2d 120 (1992)Facts
In the 1970s, States could dispose of their radioactive waste in only Nevada, Washington, and South Carolina. Nevada, Washington, and South Carolina (the sited States), became either unwilling to accept more waste or ordered a reduction in the total waste they would accept. With the prospect of there being potentially nowhere left to dispose of radioactive waste, Congress enacted the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985. The Act provided that sited States would continue accepting waste from un-sited States for seven years. But by 1992, the sited States would no longer be required to accept out-of-state waste. After 1992, to dispose of their waste, un-sited States would need to form regional compacts with other States or create a waste-disposal facility within their State.
At issue here, the Act provided three incentives to ensure State compliance. First, the Act provided for “monetary incentives,” where the sited States would place one quarter of their surcharges into an account. States that complied with the Act would be repaid their surcharge payments, but those that did not would forfeit the money. Second, the Act provided “access incentives.” If a State failed to join a regional compact or create its own waste disposal site by the deadline, it would be charged higher fees from sited-States and could eventually be denied access to the site completely. Finally, the Act provided a “take title” provision. Under this provision, if a State failed to join a compact or create its own disposal site by the deadline, it would have to “take title to the waste” and be held “liable for all damages directly or indirectly incurred by [the waste].”
New York sought to comply with the Act by creating its own disposal site, but the counties in which the site was proposed opposed its construction. The counties and New York alleged that, by directing the States to regulate in a certain manner, Congress ran afoul of the Tenth Amendment.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.
Topic Resources
Topic Refresher Course
Introduction to Congressional Powers