What is Cooperative Federalism?

Federalism describes a system of running a government in which the national government shares powers with the regional or state governments. Dual federalism was practiced in the United States from the nation's beginning era. However, it is the cooperative federalism that exists today in the country's constitution. From the 1780s, it became evident that the states had increasingly become more diverse with autonomous and self-serving laws and policies, the newly formed USA nation began splitting apart.

There was a decline in the economy, which led to even greater divisions in the country, with Daniel Shays leading rebels against the nation, attacking towns and burning courthouses.

The national government (with limited constitutional powers and funds) could not act, and Congress had no money because constitutionally they could not tax but depend on states, which blocked their funding. The tensions arose mainly from disagreements over states' rights to business regulations, to leave the USA, and to reform and implement policies including issues of abortions, poverty, as well as race.

Get quality help now

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

Proficient in: Federalism

4.7 (235)

“ Amazing writer! I am really satisfied with her work. An excellent price as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Another reason for the tensions was a Tenth Amendment's incorporation into the USA constitution, which was meant to explain each government's powers.

The USA national government has more powers today because a change to cooperative federalism meant that the national government could henceforth regulate business and other activities across states, and raise the military forces. Moreover, the Supreme Court headed by John Marshall as Chief Justice introduced many judicial opinions that increased the national government powers much above the state powers from the year 1801 to 35.

As a lawyer, I will use the clause of equal protection to argue that the federal government should regulate the country's education. Supreme Court had already delivered judgment in 1896, denying Texas State the right to education regulation. The opponent lawyer could use a 1973 ruling by the Supreme Court which stated that education was not fundamentally a right, and therefore, could be controlled locally. He could also use the ruling that upheld as constitutional the Texas inequitable tax policy for education.