What if Federal Law was the Only Law?

-

The United States of America has prided itself from the beginning in freedom and liberty; however, it seems different people have different views on what freedom means in a country and how it should be allowed. Obviously too much freedom can lead a nation into chaos, but too little and citizen oppression begins, which is exactly what the founders wanted to escape from. The American government has run well for years as an effective and powerful nation, but not without struggles on the topics of individual liberties throughout its existence.. Religious ideals played a massive part in the government denying citizens of the LGBTQ+ community and differing races basic rights to marriage and anti-discrimination laws up until recently. Also, not to mention the long, brutal history of how slavery of black and indigenous people of color built the country. By maintaining the rule that federal law is strictly superior (as stated in the Supremacy Clause), doing away with state-by-state laws made by local governments can protect the rights and freedoms of American citizens more effectively while also protecting the rights granted to the states in the tenth amendment.

The Supremacy Clause in the Constitution grants the federal government the power to exercise federal law over state law if a conflict occurs. So, why allow the state governments to make their own laws anyway? Especially in recent years (and to show it's still relevant today), the federal government has had to intervene and grant "new" individual national liberties to citizens over the years due to changing beliefs that should've been the jurisdiction of state law, anyway. State law is supposed to be reserved to maintain citizen and internal issues, such as marriage and divorce, child services, state licensing for jobs or driving, regulating state commerce, etc. However, during the civil rights movement in the 1960s and again in same-sex marriage legalization in 2015, just to name significant examples, the American government had to intervene, and passed laws that granted citizen rights for the betterment of society. These laws should have fallen to the states' responsibility, but shouldn't have in the first place, as proven twice in the last century when they couldn't handle such controversial matters and the federal government stepped in. These responsibilities should fall to the federal government immediately, rather than spending years denying citizens' rights who are just like everyone else, while the state and federal courts dance around the issue due to needless constitutional policies. If the federal government could immediately take care of the issue when it first became controversial while the word "liberty" was questioned once more and without having to go through the states' battles, these rights could've been granted to the people sooner.

Without the state governments making laws of their own, their rights protected by the Constitution would not be jeopardized. According to the tenth amendment in the U.S. Constitution, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." This means the states are granted any powers the federal government doesn't have, given by the Constitution. These rights include powers such as property management, setting local education standards, distribution of government benefit programs, establishing local governments, maintaining infrastructure, citizen safety, upkeep of local justice systems, and fundraising, to name a few. The states would still be able to exercise and operate under these powers still without trivial state-to-state laws. If the federal government set national regulation laws for different areas like those stated above, and supply the states with the resources necessary to enforce said laws, citizens wouldn't have to worry about travel within the states, and keeping up with the specific local laws enforced in each area. Everyone would be living under the same laws that provide necessities to everyone in the same way, without discrimination, while also upholding the Constitutional rights to the states.

The freedoms of American citizens can be ensured without the tediousness of state laws, of course, as long as the right people are voted in to protect those freedoms. As long as the Supremacy clause is still active, state-to-state laws are unnecessary. It would be simpler if the federal government established national laws only and provide states whatever resources they need in order to enforce the federal laws. The states are the needless middlemen between national order and the federal government, that only prolong important processes of law.