In Printz v. United States, SCOTUS held that the Constitution bars the federal government from forcing or otherwise ...

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Reposted by You Can’t Have Popehats
https://bsky.app/profile/kenwhite.bsky.social

Steve Vladeck
‪@stevevladeck.bsky.social‬

In Printz v. United States, #SCOTUS held that the Constitution bars the federal government from forcing or otherwise compelling local or state governments to enforce federal law.

The liberal squish who wrote the majority opinion in that case? Justice Antonin Scalia:

https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep521/usrep521898/usrep521898.pdf

Screenshot of TruthSocial post by President Trump complaining that Mayor Frey won't enforce federal immigration law, and calling it a "very serious violation of the Law."
ALT
8:41 AM · Jan 28, 2026

In Printz v. United States, #SCOTUS held that the Constitution bars the federal government from forcing or otherwise compelling local or state governments to enforce federal law.

The liberal squish who wrote the majority opinion in that case? Justice Antonin Scalia:

tile.loc.gov/storage-serv...

— Steve Vladeck (@stevevladeck.bsky.social) 2026-01-28T13:41:23.554Z

[dalton99a]

1. Kick

[sop]

2. Yeah, that was back when they believed in "state's rights," and Democrats were in control.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. Bloviating fear again

empty barrels rattle the loudest

[UpInArms]

4. I see the giant anus is spewing shit again

Mariomushroomdicktinyhandsnosoul is so annoying

[SergeStorms]

5. What Donald Trump knows about the laws of this country....

could fit on top of a down quark.

Sorry, that's a little particle physics humor there.

[Lonestarblue]

6. Trump's understanding of the law is limited to the Supreme Court said I could break any law I wanted.

[BidenRocks]

9. So you grew up with endless mocking too?

In a what is it question, I answered that it resembles the proton flow in a Bevatron. 1966 I was 11.
Think Charlie Brown.
I read comics and was science interested.
Mocking in school killed that.

[Just Jerome]

11. Somebody oughta

spray meson his orange mug.

[quakerboy]

7. Yeah, but in Trump v. FUCKYALLIAMTHELAW

They ruled fuck yall, Trump is the law. So, whatcha gonna do?

[live love laugh]

8. The Scalia ruling sounds like a slippery slope if applied to other nonimmigration federal laws.

It’s great that it helps fight the regime now but does it mean states opt out of all federal laws?

[Ol Janx Spirit]

10. They do not opt out of federal laws, they just can't be compelled to enforce federal laws for the federal government.

This principle of “anti-commandeering” dates back to the 1842 Supreme Court decision Prigg v. Pennsylvania, in which the justices ruled that local and state law enforcement agencies could not be compelled to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act.

In short: the state is tasked with enforcing state laws; the federal government is tasked with enforcing federal laws. States cannot formally nullify federal law, nor can they block federal agents from operating within their borders--but they cannot be forced by the federal government to enforce federal laws.

Of course, due to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, federal laws and treaties made under the authority of the United States constitute the "supreme Law of the Land", and thus take priority over any conflicting state laws.

[live love laugh]

12. Thanks for clarifying that.

[Buddyzbuddy]

13. "Playing with fire" does colonel bonespurs plan on nuking them?.

Last edited Wed Jan 28, 2026, 03:58 PM - Edit history (1)

Correction, I should've queried, does he plan on nuking us because "them" is us. We are all Americans. What he and they are doing is un-American.

I want my Country back!

[BumRushDaShow]

14. Stare decisis is no longer sacrosanct for the majority of the current Supreme Court

[FakeNoose]

15. I'm so old I can remember when the Repukes believed in "states' rights"

In fact that was something the Repukes had many rallies and protests about. That silly notion that the federal government can't force its will over the individual states, whenever the federal law conflicts with state laws.

What an odd idea .... And it's printed up in the Constitution too. SCOTUS actually said so.