> drinking ages
The federal government used a bit of a loophole here. Instead of regulating individual states, they simply set a drinking age of 21 as a requirement, else they'll lose 10 percent of their federal highway funds.
The federal government used a bit of a loophole here. Instead of regulating individual states, they simply set a drinking age of 21 as a requirement, else they'll lose 10 percent of their federal highway funds.
Interesting case law the above poster is referencing I think: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Dole
Notably one of the dissenting judges said this: "establishment of a minimum drinking age of 21 is not sufficiently related to interstate highway construction to justify so conditioning funds appropriated for that purpose."
It did however pass the supreme court at 7-2.
Not necessarily. Pretty much every state had to ask themselves the same question: "Do we care more about highway funding or the very small number of people 18-21 who vote?"
It's actually a very easy question in political calculus terms.
No.
Our political system involves some specific separations of powers, but politics is not fundamentally about thst.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/four-ti...
Trump has tried to restrict federal funding to "sanctuary cities" as a way to coerce them into prosecuting illegal immigrants. It was struck down as not passing the South Dakota test, but he may try again.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-executive-order-sanctuary...
The federal government also prohibits states from stopping federal funding of Planed Parenthood, which arguably cross-subsidizes (though does not directly fund) abortion.
https://qz.com/863101/title-x-obama-enacts-a-law-mandating-t...
What's this? Google just returns a bunch of results for the South Dakota DMV exam.